Valery Minin - Bellona Network · 1050 Brussels, Belgium [email protected] Russia: ERC Bellona P/O...

Valery Minin

ECONOMIC ASPECTS OF SMALL-SCALE RENEWABLE

ENERGY DEVELOPMENT IN REMOTE SETTLEMENTS OF THE KOLA PENINSULA

Murmansk

2012

Publisher:

Bellona Foundation www.bellona.org

Norway: Bellona Foundation P/O Box 2141 Grünerløkka N+0505 Oslo, Norway [email protected] Belgium: Bellona Europe 10 B, Clos du Parnasse 1050 Brussels, Belgium [email protected]

Russia: ERC Bellona P/O Box 58 191028 St. Petersburg, Russia [email protected] Bellona Murmansk P. O. Box 4310 183038 Murmansk, Russia [email protected]

Copying permitted when source is stated.

Original Russian text Valery Minin English version prepared by Maria Kaminskaya Cover design and layout Sergei Burtsev, Drugiye Pravila Digital Printing

http://www.bellona.org/

mailto:[email protected]




Contents Foreword ....................................................................................................................................................... 5

1. Murmansk Region: A brief survey ............................................................................................................. 6

1.1 Geography, climate, and infrastructure .............................................................................................. 6

1.2. Fuel and energy resources and their development ........................................................................... 8

2. Off-grid energy supply in Murmansk Region: Current situation ............................................................... 9

2.1. Types and brief descriptions of off-grid consumers of Murmansk Region ........................................ 9

2.2. Fuel deliveries to decentralized consumers ..................................................................................... 10

2.3. Off-grid power supply ...................................................................................................................... 11

2.4. Off-grid heating ................................................................................................................................ 14

2.5. Expected energy consumption levels in small rural communities of Murmansk Region ................ 19

3. Murmansk Region’s renewable energy sources and prospects of their application .............................. 20

3.1. Wind power ...................................................................................................................................... 20

3.2. Small hydropower ............................................................................................................................ 22

3.3. Solar power ...................................................................................................................................... 23

3.4. Tidal power ....................................................................................................................................... 25

3.5. Wave power ..................................................................................................................................... 26

3.6. Bioenergy resources ......................................................................................................................... 27

4. Suggestions for renewable energy application for off-grid energy supply in Murmansk Region ........... 28

4.1. Wind energy converters for power supply of weather stations and lighthouses in Tsyp-Navolok,

Kharlov Island, and Tersko-Orlovsky ....................................................................................................... 29

4.2. Wind converters for off-grid power supply of border outposts in Pummanki and Kildin ............... 31

4.3. Wind energy converter for the settlement of Chapoma ................................................................. 33

4.4. Small hydropower plant on the Yelreka near Krasnoshchelye ........................................................ 35

4.5. Small hydropower plant on the river Chavanga............................................................................... 37

4.6. Premises for application of wind energy in heat generation ........................................................... 38

4.7. Using wind energy for heating in Tsyp-Navolok and Kildin .............................................................. 38

Conclusion ................................................................................................................................................... 41

List of references ......................................................................................................................................... 43

ECONOMIC ASPECTS OF SMALL-SCALE RENEWABLE ENERGY DEVELOPMENT IN REMOTE SETTLEMENTS OF THE KOLA PENINSULA 5

Foreword Recent years have seen researchers worldwide concentrate their efforts on finding, and

introducing into the fuel and energy production cycle, non-conventional renewable energy sources such

as solar and wind power, small-scale hydropower, tidal energy, and other resources. The application

potential of these energy sources is vast, and their ecological advantages are likewise undisputed.

The great benefits offered by renewable energy have not been completely disregarded in Russia,

and certain steps have been undertaken to put them to economic use.1 Russia’s Energy Strategy for the

Period up to 2030,2 which sets priorities for the country’s energy development in the long term,

provides for an increased scale of application of renewable energy sources. Similarly, the “Principal aims

of state policy in the field of enhancing energy efficiency of electric power production based on the use

of renewable energy sources for the period until 2020” – a document approved by Decree No. 1-r, of

January 8, 2009, of the Government of the Russian Federation – also envisions engaging renewable

energy sources for economic purposes, as a means to promote energy conservation, reduce

consumption of carbon-based fuels, and curb environmental pollution.

Murmansk Region, a large administrative area on the Kola Peninsula in Russia’s European North,

has a broad range of non-conventional renewable energy sources at its disposal – the sun and wind,

small rivers, tides and ocean waves, etc. Each of these resources has its own distinct seasonal

characteristics. For instance, the supply of solar energy and hydroenergy is at its peak during summer

periods, while consumer demand is traditionally highest during the winter. Conversely, energy derived

from the wind and ocean waves reaches its maximum availability in the winter, with the onset of

seasonal cyclone activity. Finally, tidal energy is not contingent on a particular season, and its mean

monthly values remain unchanged throughout the year or across multi-year spans. These peculiarities

determine the specific areas and scope of practical application of renewable energy sources on the

peninsula.

Energy production and power supply in Murmansk Region depend to a considerable degree on

fuel shipped from other regions. A special category among the region’s energy consumers is formed by

remote decentralized consumers based in outlying, coastal, and border areas of the Kola Peninsula. Fuel

deliveries to such consumers are fraught with significant logistical difficulties. Furthermore, because of

the rising fuel expenses incurred by the sea, road, and other transport – including, at times, aviation –

whose services are used for such deliveries, the prime cost of electric power and heat produced at local

diesel-fired power stations and boiler houses ends up being several times as high as that of electricity

and heat provided to consumers served by the grid. This is why the issue of utilizing local energy sources

– renewable energy sources among them – is one deserving of the greatest attention with respect to

decentralized consumers specifically. In particular, a more vigorous use of renewables in local energy

production could become a main avenue for advancing the goals of energy conservation and enhancing

the economic efficiency of decentralized energy supply systems.

These considerations prompted what was deemed both an important and timely effort to take a

closer look at renewable energy’s prospects and resources available to the energy industry of the Kola

Peninsula, and to attempt an outline of the basis for – as well as the possible scale and areas of –

application of renewable energy sources in off-grid energy supply. The results of this study are offered

to the reader in the present report.

1 Bezrukikh P.P., Borisov G.A., Vissarionov V.I. et al. Energy resources and the efficiency of using renewable energy

sources in Russia. – St. Petersburg: Nauka, 2002. – 314 pages. (Ресурсы и эффективность использования возобновляемых источников энергии в России / Безруких П.П., Борисов Г.А., Виссарионов В.И. и др. – С.-Пб.: Наука, 2002. – 314с.). 2 Energy Strategy of Russia for the Period up to 2030. – Moscow: Institute of Energy Strategy, 2010. – 180 pages.

(Энергетическая стратегия России на период до 2030 года. – М.: ГУ Институт энергетической стратегии, 2010. – 180с.). See also the English version of this document at http://www.energystrategy.ru/projects/docs/ES-2030_%28Eng%29.pdf.

http://www.energystrategy.ru/projects/docs/ES-2030_%28Eng%29.pdf


6 ECONOMIC ASPECTS OF SMALL-SCALE RENEWABLE ENERGY DEVELOPMENT IN REMOTE SETTLEMENTS OF THE KOLA PENINSULA

1. Murmansk Region: A brief survey

1.1 Geography, climate, and infrastructure Spanning a total area of 145,000 square kilometers, Murmansk Region stretches across the

northwesternmost tip of European Russia, covering the Kola Peninsula and the adjacent territories of

the mainland in the west and southwest. Statistics available as of January 1, 2010, put total population

at 865,000 inhabitants, with 8.8 percent residing in rural communities.

Climate. Over 90 percent of Murmansk Region lies north of the Polar Circle, and the area mostly

owes its climate and weather conditions to this peculiarity of its geographical location. The warm

Atlantic ocean current Gulf Stream also plays a significant role in shaping the local climate. Taken

together, these factors account for the region’s relatively soft, yet protracted winters – up to seven or

eight months in duration – and short, cool summers. Average monthly air temperature values range

between -8° and -14° C in the winter, and between 7° and 14° C in the summer.3 Annual mean

temperatures hover around 0° C. Snow cover usually appears strong in November and remains stable for

180 to 200 days. The Kola Peninsula is also characterized by a distinctive wind regime; robust winds with

speeds of over 10 to 15 meters per second are a common feature, especially during the winter period.

The polar day and night are another characteristic phenomenon of Murmansk Region. At

69° north latitude – which crosses the area around the region’s administrative center, the city of

Murmansk – the polar day lasts from May 31 to July 11, and the polar night from December 2 to

January 11.

The predominantly cold climate of the Kola Peninsula is what determines the high demand for

electric power and, especially, heat supply among all categories of the region’s energy consumers. The

heating season spans approximately 250 to 300 days, or even longer in certain populated areas along

the coast of the Barents Sea, where it continues almost all year round, for up to 350 days.

Roads and other transport networks. Murmansk Region is served by a diverse transport system

operating railroad, water (sea-based), air, and road routes (see Pic. 1.1).

The railroad network is represented, first and foremost, by the major line connecting Murmansk

and Russia’s second largest city of St. Petersburg, in the country’s northwest, with local links branching

out toward Alakurtti, Kovdor, Kirovsk, and Nikel. A system of departmental railroads is also used to

deliver cargoes to mining enterprises and non-ferrous metal smelters and refiners, as well as sites of the

energy production industry.

Over-the-road transport is particularly common in the region. An extensive road network now

covers most of the region’s cities and towns, only lacking in sufficient development in the outlying areas

to the east, where small settlements are both quite removed – to distances of up to between 150 and

300 kilometers – from the major roads and broadly dispersed geographically. These are, for instance,

the villages of Krasnoshchelye and Kanevka in the central part of the Kola Peninsula, and all of the

coastal localities of Tersky, Lovozersky, and Severomorsky Districts.

Sea-based transport accounts for a considerable share of the region’s shipping traffic.

Murmansk is a major warm-water sea port, and remains in operation throughout the year. This is the

point of origin for local cargo traffic bound for coastal communities of the Kola Peninsula. The region’s

other large sea port is Kandalaksha, which handles hefty volumes of freight moved along the shipping

routes of the White Sea.

3USSR Climate Reference Book. Vol. 1, Part 2. Air and soil temperatures. – Leningrad: Gidrometeoizdat, 1965. – 359

pages. (Справочник по климату СССР. Вып. 1, ч. 2. Температура воздуха и почвы. – Л.: Гидрометеоиздат, 1965. – 359с.).


Air traffic is mostly routed through the two principal airports of Murmansk and Kirovsk. Local air

routes, serviced by the airports Lovozero and Umba, also connect the region’s central areas with remote

localities, where aviation remains all but the single accessible means of transport during the winter

period.

Power networks. The majority of Murmansk Region’s urban and rural energy consumers receive

their power from the Kola Power Grid. The grid’s total installed capacity exceeds 3,700 megawatts and is

unique in composition: It derives electricity from 17 hydropower stations; five thermal power plants;

Kola Nuclear Power Plant; and a tidal power plant, the only one in operation in Russia. All these sources

supply power to a unified high-voltage transmission network (see Pic. 1.2) for distribution managed via

central dispatch.

Pic. 1.1. Traffic networks of Murmansk Region: Off-grid energy consumers.

Weather stations: 1 – Vayda-Guba; 2 – Tsyp-Navolok; 3 – Kharlov Island; 4 – Kolmyavr; 5 – Svyatoy Nos; 6 – Tersko-

Orlovsky; 7 - Sosnovets Island; 8 – Pyalitsa; 9 – Chavanga; 10 – Nivankyul.

Lighthouses: 11 – Vaydagubsky; 12 – Tsyp-Navolok; 13 – Set-Navolok; 14 – Tyuvagubsky; 15 – Kildinsky Severny

(North Kildinsky); 16 – Teribersky; 17 – Russkiy; 18 – Kharlovsky; 19 – Svyatonossky; 20 – Gorodetsky; 21 – Tersko-

Orlovsky; 22 – Sosnovetsky; 23 – Nikodimsky.

Border outposts: 24 – Pummanki; 25 – Tsyp-Navolok; 26 – Kildin; 27 – Gavrilovo; 28 – Vostochnaya (East) Litsa; 29 –

Drozdovka; 30 – Ponoi.

Fisheries and deer farms: 31 – Sosnovka; 32 – Chapoma; 33 – Chavanga; 34 – Krasnoshchelye.


The Kola grid is connected by 330-kilovolt overhead transmission lines with the Republic of

Karelia, to the southwest of the Kola Peninsula, and, via Karelia, with the unified power grid of

Northwest Russia. High-voltage power lines also link the Kola power system with those of Norway and

Finland.

Centralized power supply is available on roughly one half of the territory of Murmansk Region,

or to over 99 percent of total population. At the same time, several dozen settlements (see Pic. 2.1

through 2.3 below), due to their locations at considerable distances from the grid and low levels of

power consumption, do not have access to centralized electricity supply and instead receive their power

from small diesel-fired stations running at capacities of between 8 and 500 kilowatts.

1.2. Fuel and energy resources and their development The territory of Murmansk Region has no fossil fuel deposits available for development.

However, intensive geological exploration of the last fifteen to twenty years has led to the discovery of

several oil and gas fields in the Barents Sea, on the shelf adjacent to the northeastern coast of the Kola

Peninsula. The combined extractable resources of two of the natural gas fields closest to the peninsula –

Murmanskoye (Murmansk) and Severokildinskoye (North Kildin) deposits – total no less than 300 to

500 billion cubic meters, while the reserves of the Shtokman field are estimated at 3,700 billion cubic

meters.

At the same time, the practical development of the discovered gas reserves is in its initial stages

at the moment. For the time being, all types of fuel that Murmansk Region employs for various uses –

gasoline, fuel oil varieties, gas, coal, diesel, and nuclear fuel – are shipped from other Russian regions.

Gasoline and fuel oil are used to power road and sea transport; boiler houses and cogeneration heat

Pic. 1.2. Electric power networks of the Kola Power Grid.

Hydropower plant cascades: I-III: Nivsky (Niva) Cascade; IV-VIII: Pazsky (Paz) Cascade; IX-XI: Kovdinsky (Kovda)

Cascade; XII-XIII: Tulomsky (Tuloma) Cascade; XV-XVI: Serebryansky (Serebryanka) Cascade; XVII-XVIII: Teribersky

(Teriberka) Cascade.


and power plants run on coal and fuel oil; liquefied gas is used in households for domestic purposes; and

nuclear fuel is burned in the four reactors of Kola Nuclear Power Plant. Off-grid consumers in small

settlements commonly have demand for gasoline and diesel fuel, which they use as car fuel and at local

diesel power stations. Heat generation plants often run on firewood, either locally produced or shipped

from elsewhere, and, less frequently, on coal.

2. Off-grid energy supply in Murmansk Region: Current situation

2.1. Types and brief descriptions of off-grid consumers of Murmansk Region Depending on their location, the specific activities they are engaged in, and levels of demand for

energy and power supply, off-grid consumers in Murmansk Region fall into the following distinct groups:

a) Weather stations and lighthouses (see Pic. 2.1 and 2.2).

The electricity these consumers receive is used to power the special equipment and devices

operated at these sites, to provide lighting in the buildings and on the surrounding premises, and to run

various domestic appliances. A significant amount of total energy consumed – as much as 60

to 80 percent – is used to heat both the work areas and living quarters. At present, electricity supplied

to these consumers is provided by gasoline- and diesel-driven power generators of capacities ranging

between 8 and 20 kilowatts; heat is supplied by means of boilers running at capacities of up to

20,000 kilocalories per hour or simple fire stoves. The total power and heating load per each consumer

in this group varies between 20 and 50 kilowatts.

Pic. 2.1. Remote weather stations operating in

Murmansk Region.

1 – Vayda-Guba; 2 – Tsyp-Navolok; 3 – Kharlov

Island; 4 – Kolmyavr; 5 – Svyatoy Nos; 6 – Tersko-

Orlovsky; 7 - Sosnovets Island; 8 – Pyalitsa; 9 –

Chavanga; 10 – Kashkarantsy; 11 – Kanozero; 12 –

Nivankyul.

Pic. 2.2. Lighthouses run by the Hydrographic

Service on the coast of the Kola Peninsula.

1 – Vaydagubsky; 2 – Tsyp-Navolok; 3 – Set-Navolok; 4 –

Tyuvagubsky; 5 – Kildinsky Severny (North Kildinsky); 6 –

Teribersky; 7 – Russkiy; 8 – Kharlovsky; 9 – Svyatonossky;

10 – Gorodetsky; 11 – Tersko-Orlovsky; 12 –

Sosnovetsky; 13 – Nikodimsky; 14 – Kashkarantsy.


b) Coastal border outposts (see Pic. 2.3).

Electricity is supplied to these sites by small diesel-fired power stations with installed capacities

of up to 60 kilowatts (running two or three diesel-generators of between 15 and 20 kilowatts each).

Coal- or liquid-fuel-based boiler systems with capacities of 0.1 to 0.2 gigacalories per hour are used to

provide heat to work and residential areas. Common wood- or coal-burning stoves are also in

widespread use. The combined electricity and heating load for each consumer in this group is between

100 and 150 kilowatts.

c) Shore-based naval sites of the

Russian Northern Fleet.

These operate to provide support to the

Navy’s various services and differ in their

specific activities and the volumes of energy

consumed. Some of these sites receive electric

power from 100- to 150-kilowatt diesel power

stations running two or three diesel generators

with capacities of between 30 and 50 kilowatts

each. The heating load at such sites reaches

between 0.3 and 0.5 gigacalories per hour and is

provided by boiler plants fired by either coal or

liquid fuel.

d) Fishing enterprises, large deer

farms, and other isolated remote settlements

(see Pic. 2.3).

These include the fishing collective

farms (or kolkhozy) Belomorsky Rybak and

Chapoma, in Chavanga and Chapoma,

respectively – both in Tersky District – as well as

the deer-breeding farm (or state farm, sovkhoz)

Tundra, in Krasnoshchelye, and the settlement

of Sosnovka, these two in Lovozersky District.

Electricity supply to these consumers is provided by local diesel power stations with capacities

ranging between 200 and 500 kilowatts. For heating purposes, boiler systems running on fossil fuel with

capacities of 2 to 3 gigacalories per hour could be used in the future.

2.2. Fuel deliveries to decentralized consumers A wide variety of methods are used to deliver fuel to small off-grid consumers residing in

outlying areas of Murmansk Region. The logistics at hand depend on the consumer’s specific needs and

activities, the settlement’s location relative to the nearest source of fuel supply, and the current

condition of the traffic network. Coastal communities on the White and Barents seas receive their fuel

via shipments by sea. Deliveries of full annual fuel supplies are made during the summer navigation

period. Tankers, proceeding along the shore, offload fuel supplies to each of the settlements in turn.

Where a particular settlement lacks berthing facilities, fuel unloading is done while the ship is at

anchorage, and either smaller vessels or a pipeline are then used to deliver the fuel to shore. Further

delivery to remote communities on the mainland is done by road transport or track-type vehicles, as

well as cat trains and, sometimes, by air.

Pic. 2.3. Locations of border outposts (I through

VII), fisheries, and deer farms on the Kola

Peninsula.

Border outposts: I – Pummanki; II – Tsyp-Navolok; III –

Kildin; IV – Gavrilovo; V – Vostochnaya (East) Litsa; VI –

Drozdovka; VII – Ponoi.

Remote settlements: 1 – Chavanga (Belomorsky Rybak

fishing cooperative); 2 – Chapoma (Chapoma fishing

cooperative); 3 – Krasnoshchelye (Tundra deer farm); 4

– Sosnovka.


Information collected on the costs of fuel shipping and deliveries by various transport means in

Murmansk Region indicates that higher costs involved in local logistics cause fuel prices to rise

significantly for the end consumer. Analysis shows that as shipments are taken over for local deliveries,

prices increase by 1.2 to 1.5 times if delivered by road transport, 1.3 to 1.8 times if transported by boats,

1.5 to 2.5 times if off-road vehicles are used, and by three times or more if delivered by air, compared to

the original selling price when initially disbursed at the fuel supply distribution point.

With wholesale prices for diesel hovering in 2011 at between RUR 26,000 and RUR 27,000 per

ton, its price after delivery to the end consumer can reach between RUR 30,000 and

RUR 50,000 (EUR 750 to EUR 1,250*) per ton. Calculated in standard fuel values**, this corresponds to

EUR 550 to EUR 900 per ton of fuel equivalent, respectively (the heating value of standard fuel is 7,000

kilocalories per kilogram; for diesel fuel, this value is 10,000 kilocalories per kilogram).

The high fuel prices affect the efficiency and economic performance of the region’s energy-

producing sites. This is why one of the crucial issues faced by remote communities with no access to

centralized power and energy supply is one of mindful and frugal use of delivered fuel and finding ways

and methods to enhance energy efficiency and reduce fuel consumption.

2.3. Off-grid power supply Because of the geographical locations of the areas where most off-grid consumers reside – and

the low levels of power and energy consumption – bringing a grid connection to these highly scattered

and isolated remote communities is an economically unviable option. Accordingly, local – mostly, diesel-

based – power plants will likely continue to serve as primary electricity sources for these consumers

both today and in the near future.

Large diesel power plants operate five to six diesel generators, while smaller sites are usually

equipped with just two or three generating sets. Lower-capacity sets are commonly used during the

low-load summer months or provide additional electricity along with the primary generators during

peak-load periods.

Table 1 lists the operating and economic characteristics of some of the diesel power plants

currently in use in a number of rural localities of Murmansk Region. As shown in the table, the number

of hours the installed capacity of sites is used over the year varies widely. At best, this value reaches

slightly over 3,300 hours. But in those communities that are experiencing financial difficulties, and

where the goal of extending the service life of the diesel engines is, by necessity, a priority, the common

practice is to use the generators as sparingly as possible – which amounts to no more than between

800 and 1,000 hours of operation a year. In these localities, power stations do not, as a rule, work during

night hours, and in the summer, due to the prolonged length of day and the decreased demand for

lighting, the stations’ operating time is limited to between five and eight hours a day (in the morning

and late afternoon only).

The capacity of a particular site and the time it remains in operation throughout the day have a

direct effect on the number of personnel working at the plant. During the summer months, a single

employee is sufficient to run a 30- to 100-kilowatt station. In the winter, two or three employees usually

remain on site. Larger power plants require a significantly higher number of operating staff.

* Here and elsewhere in the report (unless otherwise indicated), prices and euro equivalents for amounts in

Russian roubles are rendered as given in the Russian original, written in 2011. Present exchange rates may differ. – Translator. **

Standard fuel (or fuel equivalent) is a concept used in the USSR and Russia to measure comparative efficiencies of various types of fuel, with one unit corresponding to one kilogram of fuel with a heat combustion of 7,000 kilocalories per kilogram. A common international unit of energy is the ton of oil equivalent, or the amount of energy released by burning one ton of crude oil. The International Energy Agency (IEA) determines one ton of oil equivalent to be equal to 41.868 gigajoules. – Translator.


The specific fuel consumption rate of natural diesel fuel at diesel power plants is quite high – at

320 to 400 grams per kilowatt-hour. Calculated in standard fuel units, this corresponds to 460 to

570 grams of fuel equivalent per kilowatt-hour***. The prime cost of power produced at diesel-fired

stations is likewise quite considerable, ranging between RUR 13 and RUR 17 (EUR 0.34 and EUR 0.44,

respectively****) per kilowatt-hour. A comparison with the prime cost of energy that is supplied to grid-

connected consumers gives a difference marked enough to put diesel-produced electricity in a separate

pricing range.

Table 1. Operating and economic characteristics of diesel power plants in coastal communities of

Murmansk Region’s Tersky District.

Locality, name

Indicator

Inst

alle

d c

apac

ity,

in k

ilow

atts

Nu

mb

er o

f p

ow

er-

gen

erat

ing

sets

An

nu

al o

utp

ut,

in t

ho

usa

nd

kilo

wat

t-h

ou

rs

Use

of

inst

alle

d c

apac

ity,

in h

ou

rs

Nu

mb

er o

f o

per

atin

g p

erso

nn

el

Year

ly f

uel

co

nsu

mp

tio

n r

ate

, in

to

ns

Act

ual

sp

ecif

ic f

uel

co

nsu

mp

tio

n r

ate,

in

gra

ms

per

kilo

wat

t-h

ou

rs

Operating costs

Including, in percent

Tota

l, in

th

ou

san

d r

ou

ble

s

Fuel

co

sts

Sala

ries

/wag

es

Dep

reci

atio

n

Oth

er

Varzuga, Kuzomen,

Kashkarantsy 535 6 1,801 3,366 19 716 398 87 9 1.9 2.1 11,588

Chavanga, Tetrino

310 4 297 958 6 101 341 71.1 15.3 4.1 9.5 1,844

Chapoma 540 6 440 815 4 141 320 90 9.1 - 0.9 1,868

Operating expenses involved in running a diesel power plant and how they are distributed

across the cost structure (see Table 1 above) depends to a significant degree on local factors such as the

logistics of fuel delivery and delivery costs. In those localities that lack well-established and convenient

transport links, fuel expenses are what primarily determines the prime cost of power produced. The

share of these expenses in the overall structure of operating costs may reach 70 to 80 percent (of which

25 to 35 percent will account for delivery costs).

Fuel expenses, further, are composed of fixed and variable costs, the former representing the

cost of fuel loading and unloading upon delivery, and the latter contingent on the length of haul. An in-

depth look at these expenses reveals that the fixed costs involved in liquid fuel delivery are four or five

times greater than the variable costs. An increase in the distance of haul from 200 to 600 kilometers

only results in a 10- to 15-percent increase in the shipping expenses. This, furthermore, is true for

***

See also Footnote ** for background on this and other references to “standard fuel” or “fuel equivalent” in this report. – Translator. ****

This rouble-to-euro conversion is accurate as per the rate current as of March 21, 2012. – Translator.


destinations that have well-developed berthing infrastructure to facilitate fuel unloading from the

tanker upon delivery. In practical reality, however, not all of the remote coastal communities that

depend on fuel deliveries for electricity and heating offer suitable and reliable conditions for ships to

approach the shore or the necessary facilities available for mooring. Where this is the case, fuel is

unloaded from the tanker while at anchorage with the help of small vessels – the only option of choice

that leads to longer unloading times and further increases the fixed costs of fuel delivery, and, by

extension, fuel expenses overall. In the end result, fuel expenses are influenced more by how fast and

efficiently fuel is unloaded upon delivery than by the distance it has traveled before arriving at its

destination.

Depreciation expenses at old diesel-based power plants in operation in Murmansk Region

remain within the range of 5 to 7 percent of total operating costs – a characteristic accounted for,

apparently, by the high degree of wear and tear sustained by the plants’ buildings and equipment.

Standard calculation of the prime cost of electric power produced at diesel-based power plants

Total annual operating costs at a diesel power plant include fuel expenses, wages and salaries,

depreciation costs, maintenance, and other expenses. The prime cost of power produced at a diesel

plant will be calculated as the ratio of the total sum of operating costs to the plant’s annual output.

Other values used in the calculation – specific fuel consumption rate, number of operating staff,

depreciation rate, and capital investment per unit of production – are provided in Table 2 below. The

results of the calculation are shown in Pic. 2.4.

Table 2. Operating characteristics of diesel power plants.4

Number of residents in locality

Diesel plant capacity, in kilowatts

Specific consumption rate, in grams of fuel equivalent per kilowatt-hour

Number of personnel

Depreciation rate, in percent

Capital investment per unit of production, in thousand roubles per kilowatt

20 50

100 200 500

20 50

100 200 500

460 428 410 395 383

2 3 5 7

14

20 17 15 13 10

23 17 13 10 7.5

As illustrated in Pic. 2.4 below, at a plant capacity of 100 to 300 kilowatts, the prime cost of

power generated by the diesel power plant will be RUR 14 to RUR 18 per kilowatt-hour. Because of the

high fuel prices, fuel expenses will remain the predominant component of this, accounting for between

50 and 80 percent of the prime cost of diesel electricity. Employee compensation is the second largest

expense item, corresponding to 15 to 30 percent of the prime cost.

4 Vissarionov V.I., Belkina S.V., Deryugina G.V., Kuznetsova V.A., Malinin N.K. Energy-producing equipment for the

application of unconventional and renewable energy sources. – Moscow: OOO Firma VIEN, 2004. – 448 pages. (Энергетическое оборудование для использования нетрадиционных и возобновляемых источников энергии / Виссарионов В.И., Белкина С.В., Дерюгина Г.В., Кузнецова В.А., Малинин Н.К. – М.: ООО фирма “ВИЭН”, 2004. – 448с.).


Pic. 2.4. Prime cost of diesel electricity and its correlation

with diesel power plant capacity and fuel costs.

The number of hours the

installed capacity of a diesel power plant

is in use has been taken as equal to

3,000, a value considered suitable to

ensure both the optimal conditions for

the operation of the plant’s equipment

and a sufficiently comfortable level of

power supply for the residents of a

remote community.

Diesel fuel expenses have been

assumed to be within a range of

between RUR 34,000 and RUR 40,000

per ton (or RUR 24,000 and RUR 28,000

per ton of fuel equivalent, respectively),

with costs of delivery by local

distribution transport taken into

account.

The main strategy to reduce the

prime cost of electricity generated at

diesel power plants could be focused on

fuel-saving measures, including by

utilizing the potential of local renewable

energy sources – such as wind and solar

energy, small-scale hydropower,

bioenergy resources, and similar.

2.4. Off-grid heating The common types of fuel that consumers in small rural localities of Murmansk Region use for

heating are coal, oil products, firewood, and timber waste. In boiler systems with capacities of no less

than 2 gigacalories per hour, the specific fuel consumption rate reaches between 240 and 208 kilograms

of fuel equivalent per gigacalorie. Coal-fired boilers have an efficiency factor of 50 to 60 percent; for

those that burn liquid fuel, that value is within the range of 60 to 70 percent.

Small boiler systems do not allow for a high level of mechanization or automation in their

operation, which implies a greater number of staff needed to run the plant. Boiler plants with a capacity

of 2 gigacalories per hour have a staffing ratio of 5 to 7 employees per one gigacalorie per hour. This

value increases to as many as 25 to 30, or even higher, to 35 to 40 employees per gigacalorie per hour,

when servicing 0.2-gigacalorie-per-hour units running on either liquid fuel or coal, or firewood,

respectively.

The number of hours the installed capacity of a boiler house remains in use in a year depends on

the expected functions of the particular site and the prevailing weather conditions in the locality it

serves. As the material compiled for this report shows, this number for heating plants ranges between

3,000 and 3,500 hours.

Standard calculation of the prime cost of heat energy produced at boiler plants

The heating load of small rural communities with populations under 500 residents does not

exceed 2.5 gigacalories per hour. This is why, in this report, the following boiler capacity parameters


have been used as examples when examining heating options for such consumers: 0.05, 0.10, 0.25, 0.5,

1.0, and 2.5 gigacalories per hour.

Annual operating costs of boiler plants consist of fuel expenses, salaries and wages,

depreciation, maintenance, and other expenses. The prime cost of the heat energy produced will be

defined as the ratio of total operating costs to annual energy output.

Source data used to calculate annual operating costs and the prime cost of energy produced

have been applied with the following factors taken into account:

delivered fuel costs, contingent on the geographical location of the end consumers and

the condition of road and other transport links in the area;

distance to the nearest fuel distribution point – either Murmansk in the north or

Kandalaksha in the south of the Kola Peninsula (see also Table 3 below).

As of 2011, diesel fuel prices were at the level of RUR 26,000 to RUR 27,000 per ton; fuel oil

prices were within the range of between RUR 12,000 and RUR 14,000 per ton; and coal prices hovered

between RUR 1,800 and RUR 2,100 per ton. With payments for delivery by local distribution transport

added to the fuel purchase expenses, overall fuel costs rose significantly.

Table 3. Distances between remote coastal communities of Murmansk Region and fuel supply

distribution points in Murmansk and Kandalaksha.

Locality, name Distance to Murmansk, in kilometers

Locality Distance to Kandalaksha, in kilometers

Pummanki Vayda-Guba

Tsyp-Navolok Kildin

Gavrilovo Russkiy Island Kharlov Island

Vostochnaya (East) Litsa Svyatoy Nos

Mayak Gorodetsky Mayak Tersko-Orlovsky

Ponoi

180 160 100 70

110 135 185 210 310 380 440 470

Sosnovka Pyalitsa

Mayak Nikodimsky Chapoma

Tetrino Chavanga

420 350 330 320 290 270

As mentioned above, the number of hours the installed capacity of a boiler plant is used over a

given year depends on the purposes it serves and weather conditions commonly expected in the area. If

the boiler plant is used to provide heating, ventilation, and hot water supply, this parameter can be

taken as equal to 3,000 hours.

Table 4 below lists data specifying boiler efficiency ratio, number of operating personnel, and

capital investment per unit of energy produced at the plant. With heating systems running on coal and

wood, the value for the latter parameter increases by 1.3 and 1.8 times, respectively, when compared to

those burning liquid fuel.

The yearly salary of one employee working at a wood- or coal-fired boiler plant has been taken –

with Murmansk Region’s benefits and special compensation paid for work in the conditions of the

Russian Far North factored in – as equal to RUR 180,000 (RUR 15,000 a month); for employees working

at liquid-fuel-based plants, that value has been taken as equal to RUR 240,000 (RUR 20,000 per month).

The depreciation rate at small boiler plants ranges between 7 and 13 percent. In our standard

calculations, based on averaged values, this value has been assumed as equal to 10 percent.


Table 4. Boiler plant characteristics depending on the type of fuel used.5

Bo

iler

pla

nt

cap

acit

y,

in g

igac

alo

ries

per

ho

ur

Efficiency factor, in percent, if fuelled by

Number of staff servicing boiler plant, depending on fuel type

Cap

ital

inve

stm

ent

per

u

nit

of

pro

du

ctio

n b

ased

o

n li

qu

id f

uel

, in

mill

ion

rou

ble

s p

er g

igac

alo

rie

per

ho

ur

Liquid fuel Coal Firewood Liquid fuel Coal Firewood

0.05 0.10 0.25 0.50 1.00 2.50

0.60 0.60 0.60 0.65 0.65 0.70

0.50 0.50 0.50 0.55 0.55 0.60

0.40 0.45 0.45 0.50 0.50 0.55

4 4 5 6 7 8

4 5 6 7 8 9

5 7 8 9

10 12

2.50 2.35 2.20 2.10 2.05 1.65

The main factors that determine the operating parameters and economic performance of a

heating plant are its installed capacity and the price of the fuel used. A series of calculations using

different sets of source data have been done in order to assess the influence these factors have on a

plant’s operation.

Table 5 lists the results of calculating the overall operating costs and the prime cost of one unit

of heat energy produced at boiler plants running on liquid fuel. A graphic representation of the

calculated prime cost is shown in Pic. 2.5 below (Curve 1). Analogous calculations have been done with

respect to boiler plants based on other fuel types (fuel oil, coal, and wood). The results are likewise

represented graphically in Pic. 2.5 (Curves 2, 3, and 4).

Analysis shows that if a heating plant is located close to a railroad link, and thus no additional

outlay occurs as a result of paying for fuel delivery by local distribution transport, those boiler plants

that run on coal prove to be the most efficient: They provide the cheapest energy compared to other

plants within the examined capacity range (0.05 to 2.5 gigacalories per hour).

Table 5. Prime cost of heat energy produced by liquid-fuel-based heating plants located close to fuel

supply distribution points (no additional expenses on local fuel delivery).

Nu

mb

er o

f re

sid

ents

Boiler plant characteristics Operating costs, in thousand roubles

Pri

me

cost

, in

tho

usa

nd

ro

ub

les

per

gi

gaca

lori

e

Cap

acit

y, in

gi

gaca

lori

es p

er

ho

ur

Effi

cien

cy f

acto

r,

in p

erce

nt

Nu

mb

er o

f o

per

atin

g st

aff

Fuel

exp

ense

s

Sala

ries

/wag

es

Dep

reci

atio

n

Oth

er

Tota

l

10 20 50

100 200 500

0.05 0.10 0.25 0.50 1.00 2.50

0.60 0.60 0.60 0.65 0.65 0.70

4 4 5 6 7 8

677 1,355 3,387 6,252

12,505 29,029

960 960

1,200 1,440 1,680 1,920

13 24 55

105 205 413

195 197 251 309 377 467

1,845 2,536 4,893 8,106

14,764 31,829

12.3 8.4 6.5 5.4 4.9 4.2

5 Barabaner Kh.Z. Heating in rural communities. – Tallinn: Valgus, 1976. – 196 pages. (Барабанер Х.З.

Теплоснабжение сельских населенных пунктов. – Таллинн: Валгус, 1976. – 196с.).


Pic. 2.5. Expected prime cost of heat energy produced

by boiler plants located close to railroad links (no

local delivery costs) and its correlation with boiler

capacity and fuel type.

It should be specified that the curves in Pic. 2.5 illustrate calculation results based on just such

conditions where no expenditures are incurred on additional fuel delivery costs (boiler plants are

located close to the railroad). The price of distillate fuel – diesel, kerosene, and similar – is in such cases

determined by the wholesale price alone – at around RUR 26,000 per ton (or RUR 18,000 per ton of fuel

equivalent). The same is true for the price of fuel oil, at RUR 12,000 to RUR 14,000 per ton (or RUR 9,000

to RUR 10,000 per ton of fuel equivalent).

With regard to other types of fuel,

coal prices may differ depending on the

source. Coal from two sources – the

Pechora basin, in the Komi Republic in

Russia’s northwest, and the Kuznetsk basin

(Kuzbass), in Kemerovo Region in

southwestern Siberia – is in use in

Murmansk Region. According to

information provided by Apatitskaya

Thermal Power Plant, in Murmansk Region’s

town of Apatity – this station uses coal from

both sources – the price of Pechora coal is

about RUR 1,800 per ton, and Kuzbass coal

comes at a price of around RUR 2,100 per

ton, transportation costs included in each

case.

Calculated in fuel equivalent values

– taking the heating value of coal from each

source into account, at 4,000 kilocalories

per kilogram and 5,600 kilocalories per

kilogram, respectively – the average price of

coal supplied to Murmansk Region should

be within the range of between RUR 2,700

and RUR 3,100 per ton of fuel equivalent. In

our calculations, a value of RUR 3,000 per ton of fuel equivalent has been used for this parameter.

Wood supply costs in Murmansk Region fluctuate widely and depend on a number of factors.

According to data from the forestry management, logging, and sawmill company Tersky Leskhoz and the

lumber producer Belomorlesprom (both in the locality of Umba), the average price of firewood stands at

around RUR 700 per cubic meter. Taking wood density to be equal to 700 kilograms per cubic meter,

and heating value at 2,500 kilocalories per kilogram, the price of wood as calculated using standard fuel

units will be around RUR 2,800 per ton of fuel equivalent. This, accordingly, is the price that has been

used in our calculations.

In Murmansk Region, only a limited number out of all small-capacity heating plants in operation

are located near the railroad. As a rule, the distance between a heating plant and the nearest railroad

link spans between 200 and 300 kilometers, or more, and one of the additional local options – such as

road, off-road, sea, or air transport – is required to deliver the fuel to the end consumer.

A significant number of remote communities in Murmansk Region are those scattered along the

coasts of the White and Barents seas. Tankers are used to transport diesel fuel and gasoline to these

consumers. Experience shows that the costs incurred when paying for both loading and unloading works

and the shipping per se drive the price of the delivered fuel up by one third – or RUR 8,000 per ton –

compared to the initial price. For instance, distillate fuel delivered to a destination located close to the


Pic. 2.6. Expected prime cost of heat energy produced by

boiler plants located in remote communities (local delivery

costs taken into account) and its correlation with boiler

capacity and fuel type.

railroad costs RUR 26,000 per ton, but this price will increase to RUR 34,000 per ton if the destination is

one of the outlying localities on the coast. The price of fuel oil, likewise, will rise from RUR 12,000 to

RUR 20,000 per ton depending on the location of the end consumer. Calculated in standard fuel values,

the price of distillate fuel and fuel oil will be RUR 24,000 and RUR 14,000 per ton of fuel equivalent,

respectively.

As noted above, coal remains the cheapest of the fuel types shipped to Murmansk Region’s

consumers from elsewhere. Its price after delivery by rail and unloading does not exceed RUR 2,000 per

ton. The idea of using it to power heating plants to provide district heating in coastal localities seems

quite attractive. However, one needs to take into account that the heating value of Kuzbass coal, though

it has greater calorific properties than Pechora coal, is still less than that of liquid fuel – at

5,600 kilocalories per kilogram compared to liquid fuel’s 10,000 kilocalories per kilogram. In other

words, the calorific value of distillate fuel and fuel oil is 1.7 to 1.8 times greater than that of coal.

Besides, with loose goods such as coal, transportation is fraught with sizable losses: Around

20 percent of this commodity is lost while shipping, transshipping, and storage – compared to liquid

fuel, where spillage during transportation only constitutes 5 percent. This means that in order for a

heating plant to maintain efficient operation based on coal as the fuel of choice rather than liquid fuel,

the amount of coal it needs to burn to produce the same amount of energy must be multiplied by

1.75 times to account for the difference in calorific properties, and further by 1.2 times to offset

anticipated spillage during delivery – or

by a total factor of 2.1. If shipping one

ton of fuel to a remote coastal

community – irrespective of whether

liquid fuel or coal is the cargo being

delivered – costs RUR 8,000, then the

resulting price of coal after it is delivered

to the end consumer will, accordingly,

include both the initial price of

RUR 2,000 and the RUR 8,000 in

shipping charges, with the latter

multiplied by 1.2 to compensate for the

coal lost during transportation. The total

will come to RUR 11,600 per ton of coal

or, in standard fuel values, to around

RUR 15,000 per ton of fuel equivalent.

Pic. 2.6 shows the results of

calculating the prime cost of heat energy

produced by boiler plants in remote

coastal communities. The factors

mentioned above – those particular to

different fuel types, as well as the

increases in fuel costs caused by

additional payments for local delivery

and how they affect the end prices – are

all reflected in these results. A

noteworthy conclusion is that even though coal remains the cheapest of all the types of fuel shipped to

the Kola Peninsula from other Russian regions, still, the prime cost of heat energy generated by coal-

based heating plants ends up higher than that found with boiler plants running on fuel oil, and


commensurate with that of boiler plants burning distillate fuel. The reason is the higher level of capital

investments per unit of production and the greater number of operating personnel required by coal-

fired boiler plants. If, furthermore, coal of Pechora origin – which has a lesser calorific value

(4,000 kilocalories per kilogram) compared to Kuzbass coal (5,600 kilocalories per kilogram) – is used at

the plant, this serves as an additional factor of influence, making the difference in prime cost values all

the more appreciable.

The conclusion to make from this analysis is that even though coal remains a cost-effective

solution for boiler plants located close to the railroad, its use in outlying rural communities proves

economically unsound, compared to liquid fuel. As for alternatives to liquid fuel, locally collected

firewood presents a better option if sufficient quantities of this resource are in place to ensure reliable

supply to the consumer. This may be possible on the southern coast of the Kola Peninsula, where forests

available for harvesting are found in close vicinity. But the same cannot be said about the woodless

expanses of the open tundra stretching inland from the northern shore.

What particular costs are involved in the generation of heat energy at boiler plants can be seen

in Table 5 above. It shows that of all expense items, fuel costs remain the predominant one, accounting

for between 40 and 90 percent of all operating costs. Again, vigorous development and use of local

renewable energy sources could greatly facilitate efforts to reduce reliance on liquid fuel supplies and to

save on associated delivery costs.

2.5. Expected energy consumption levels in small rural communities of

Murmansk Region The overall scope of energy consumption and specific consumption patterns vary from one rural

community to another depending on a number of factors: Local climate and weather conditions, the

kinds of economic activities that are performed in a given locality, the design, planning, and layout of

existing buildings and infrastructure, the condition of housing and communal services, etc. Forecasting

future demand for energy for such a diversified group of consumers is a challenge, since the parameters

needed to determine expected consumption rates are quite variegated as well, and their impact is

difficult to predict in advance.

Because in small localities energy consumption rates are, for the most part, determined by the

patterns of heat use in domestic and communal services sectors and depend on the number of

residents, assessing the amount of energy that is commonly used in a community can be done by

examining an abstract range of localities with the following population sizes: 10, 20, 50, 100, 200, and

500 residents.

In rural communities, the share of heat energy in the overall amount of energy consumed is

quite significant, reaching between 60 and 80 percent. Before going further with this analysis, the

specific purposes for which heat energy is used by consumers – the components that make up the heat

energy consumption mix – need to be distinguished here, which are: Cooking, hot water supply, space

heating, and ventilation. Specific heat consumption rates associated with cooking and hot water supply

depend little on weather conditions and, combined, constitute a total of 1.4 to 1.6 gigacalories per

person-year. The amounts of heat that are used for space heating and ventilation, on the other hand, do

depend considerably on the seasonal factor – the duration of the heating period – as well as the thermal

characteristics of buildings and the residents’ living conditions (residential floor space per person).

Calculations show that with the thermal characteristic of one- and two-storey wood and brick buildings

at 0.6 kilocalories per cubic meter-hour-degree Celsius, living space quota at 15 square meters per

person (residential volume quota at 45 cubic meters per person), and rated outdoor and indoor

temperatures at –30 and +20 degrees Celsius, respectively, the maximum hourly rate of heat use for

space heating and ventilation will total 1,350 kilocalories per person; with heat use in public buildings


taken into account (20 to 30 percent), this value will reach 1,750 kilocalories per person. With the

number of hours of maximum heating load taken as equal to 3,500 a year, the annual per capita rate of

heat use for space heating and ventilation purposes will total 6.5 gigacalories per person-year.

Using the parameters above and assuming the fuel utilization factor as equal to 50 percent, we

can estimate (see Table 6) the required boiler plant capacities for the examined typical localities to be

within the range of 0.05 to 2.3 gigacalories per hour.

Table 6. Calculated boiler plant capacities required to meet heating needs in remote communities of

Murmansk Region.

Nu

mb

er o

f re

sid

ents

in

loca

lity

Specific heat energy consumption rate, in gigacalories per person-year

An

nu

al h

eat

en

ergy

d

eman

d in

loca

lity,

in

giga

calo

ries

per

yea

r

Use

of

bo

iler

pla

nt

max

imu

m lo

ad, i

n

ho

urs

Fuel

use

eff

icie

ncy

fa

cto

r, in

per

cen

t

Req

uir

ed b

oile

r p

lan

t

cap

acit

y, in

gig

acal

ori

es

per

ho

ur

Cooking and hot water

supply

Space heating

and ventilation

Total

10 20 50

100 200 500

1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5

6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5

8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0

80 160 400 800

1,600 4,000

3,500 3,500 3,500 3,500 3,500 3,500

50 50 50 50 50 50

0.046 0.092 0.228 0.456 0.914 2.286

As for power plant capacities, with the average required capacity per person ranging between

0.75 and 1.00 kilowatt per person6, the electric power capacities of power stations serving communities

with populations of between 10 and 500 residents will need to be within the range of 8 and

500 kilowatts.

3. Murmansk Region’s renewable energy sources and prospects of their

application

3.1. Wind power Wind as a source of energy is described as a total of its aerological and energy properties

unified into a concept of wind power cadastre7,8. These cadastral characteristics include such

parameters as average annual and monthly wind speeds, annual wind cycle, and recurrence rate of wind

speeds.

Data on average annual wind speeds serve as the basic parameter used to estimate the overall

wind intensity level, allowing, as a first approximation, for an assessment of the prospects available for

the application of wind energy converters in a particular area.

6 Stepanov I.R. Issues of energy production and supply in the north. – Leningrad: Nauka, 1976. – 129 pages.

(Степанов И.Р. Проблемы энергетики Севера. – Л.: Наука, 1976. – 129с.). 7 Minin V.A., Stepanov I.R. Wind energy cadastre of the European North of the USSR. – News of the USSR Academy

of Sciences. Energy and Transport, No. 1, 1983. – Pp. 106-114. (Минин В.А., Степанов И.Р. Ветроэнергетический кадастр европейского Севера СССР. // Изв. АН СССР. Энергетика и транспорт, №1, 1983. – С.106-114.). 8 Zubarev V.V., Minin V.A., Stepanov I.R. Application of wind energy in the Arctic. – Leningrad: Nauka, 1989. – 208

pages. (Зубарев В.В., Минин В.А. Степанов И.Р. Использование энергии ветра в районах Севера. - Л.: Наука, 1989. – 208с.).


Pic. 3.1. Average multi-year wind

speeds (in meters per second) at a 10-

meter mark above the ground in a flat

open-surface area.

Pic. 3.2. Annual cycle of average monthly wind speeds

(V, in meters per second) on the islands (1) and coast

(2) of the Barents Sea, on the coast of the White Sea

(3), in the Khybiny mountains (4), and a river

hydrograph (5).

Results of analyzing data compiled from a series of wind speed observations carried out at the

Kola Peninsula’s 37 weather survey stations9 over a period of 20 years are summarized in Pic. 3.1.

Because wind speeds depend on the area’s land relief, the wind’s elevation above the ground, and other

factors – conditions that vary considerably from one survey station to another – survey data have been

analyzed with these parameters processed accordingly for a comparison under commensurable

conditions, namely, flat open surface and a set wind elevation. The map shown in Pic. 3.1 demonstrates

that the highest wind speeds can be observed in the coastal areas of the Barents Sea. Here, on the

northern coast of the Kola Peninsula, and at an elevation equaling 10 meters above the ground, wind

speeds reach 7 to 9 meters per second. It is worth noting that the farther inland from the shoreline, the

more noticeable is the decrease in wind speeds. But the higher the elevation, the greater are the values

of average multi-year wind speeds. Incremental changes in elevation from 10 meters to 20, 50, and

70 meters result in average multi-year wind speed increases of 0.6, 1.7, and 2.1 meters per second,

respectively.

The annual wind cycle, represented in Pic. 3.2, reflects seasonal changes in average wind

speeds. On the Kola Peninsula, these changes are manifest most prominently on the northern coast,

where the difference between the winter wind speed maximum and the summer wind speed minimum

reaches 5 to 6 meters per second. The curves in Pic 3.2 show that in all areas surveyed, rather favorable

conditions exist for efficient application of wind energy in the region. Maximum wind speeds are

observed during colder seasons of the year and coincide with the seasonal period of peak electric power

and heat consumption.

Summarizing the analysis of wind energy potential of Murmansk Region, one can make the

following conclusion: Wind energy resources are not evenly spread throughout the region. Wind

intensity is noticeably above the average level in the coastal and mountainous parts of the peninsula. On

the coasts of the Barents and White seas, in fact, wind conditions are nothing short of unique, with

annual average wind speeds reaching 6 to 8 meters per second at an elevation mark of 10 meters. This,

9 Minin V.A., Dmitriyev G.S. Wind energy: A promising renewable energy resource in Murmansk Region /

Minin V.A., Dmitriyev G.S., Ivanova Ye.A. et al. / Preprint. – Apatity: Kola Science Center of the Russian Academy of Sciences, 2006. – 73 pages. (Энергия ветра – перспективный возобновляемый энергоресурс Мурманской области / Минин В.А., Дмитриев Г.С., Иванова Е.А. и др. / Препринт. – Апатиты: Изд. КНЦ РАН, 2006. – 73с.).


simply put, is one of the windiest areas in all of Russia’s European North. Such favorable factors as wind

speed recurrence rate, the presence of stable prevalent winds, and the winter wind intensity maximum

– all of these create unquestionably propitious conditions for a successful use of wind energy converters

in the area.

3.2. Small hydropower For a long time, the development of the energy production industry of Murmansk Region

pivoted on a steadily expanding use of high-efficiency hydropower resources. By now, a considerable

portion of the potential offered by the region’s major rivers has been put to use; seventeen hydropower

stations have been built in Murmansk Region. The large and medium-sized hydropower plants are

plugged into the grid and supply grid electricity via the system’s high-voltage transmission lines.

The rivers that have remained untapped for power generation, though they have suitable sites

for prospective hydropower development, are significantly removed from areas characterized by high

energy demand, which implies sizable increases in the capital and operating costs associated with

building new power stations there. Some of these sites are situated on rivers considered to be of great

importance for fisheries management and the region’s fishing industry, and construction of hydropower

installations is not permitted in these locations. At the same time, grid electricity still remains

inaccessible for many outlying villages, fishing settlements, lighthouses, weather stations, and other

energy consumers. Construction of overhead power lines to bring grid electricity to these consumers is a

costly enterprise, and these populations are forced to rely on fuel deliveries for local diesel-based power

stations and heat-generating plants. The need to find a cost-effective off-grid energy source is the

driving force behind the ongoing research into the potential and application prospects of local

renewable energy sources, including the energy of small rivers.

The term “small hydropower” is usually applied to generation facilities with capacities under

30 megawatts, built primarily to supply energy to isolated consumers or groups of small consumers. In

Russia’s Arctic regions, because of the low population density – around 3 inhabitants per square

kilometer – small hydropower stations can be expected to come with capacities not exceeding 3 to

5 megawatts. In a number of cases, a hydropower plant of a capacity ranging between less than a

hundred to a few hundred kilowatts would in fact be viewed as the most appropriate option.

Hydropower stations with an installed capacity of less than 100 kilowatts fall under the category of

micro hydropower. The flooded area per unit of installed capacity and the overall costs incurred by

building a small hydroelectric power station are, as a rule, greater than those involved in the

construction of large and medium-sized installations. But the expediency of using a small river for

electric power generation is nonetheless determined by local factors.

The notion of small hydropower as a solution to the challenge of electricity supply for off-grid

consumers is not a new one. In Murmansk Region, a series of small hydropower plants were built as

long ago as the middle of last century. Most of these stations were built from wood and generated

power using the conventional dammed method. After 25 or 30 years of operation, these sites gradually

fell into disrepair and are now completely derelict. But the appeal of using small hydropower stations

for off-grid electricity supply has grown considerably in the past years both in Russia and elsewhere in

the world.

As far as prospects for the development of small hydropower on the Kola Peninsula are

concerned, the following can be noted: The hydropower potential of small rivers implies unavoidably a

dependence on the stream flow. What possibilities are offered by this renewable energy source are

limited to the extent to which suitable sites are available for the construction of small hydropower

stations in close vicinity to the prospective consumer. In Murmansk Region, such locations would be

coastal communities residing near a river mouth, as well as a number of localities in the region’s central


and western parts that are also situated near stable river flows. Transmission of power from small

hydropower stations to the grid involves significant additional costs and is considered to be

economically ineffective.

3.3. Solar power To evaluate the potential of solar energy and the prospects of its application in Murmansk

Region, one could look at the results of surveys taken at the region’s actinometric facilities.10 There are

several actinometric stations in the region, of which three – Dalniye Zelentsy, Khibiny, and Umba –

compile data that provide information on the solar radiation conditions in the north, south, and central

area of the Kola Peninsula, respectively. An analysis of this information shows that the potential annual

values for cumulative solar radiation exposure of Murmansk Region on clear days correspond to

between 1,280 and 1,360 kilowatt-hours per square meter. High cloudiness, which is characteristic for

Murmansk Region as a whole, decreases direct solar radiation exposure here by 60 to 75 percent.

However, the same conditions are responsible for increasing diffuse radiation exposure by more than

50 percent. When actual weather conditions and cloud cover are taken into consideration, the resulting

total annual solar radiation exposure fluctuates between 650 and 850 kilowatt-hours per square meter

(see Pic. 3.3).

The higher the sun is over the horizon, the less the depth of the atmosphere that sunbeams

have to penetrate, and, accordingly, the greater the amount of solar radiation that can reach the Earth’s

surface. Pic. 3.4 summarizes data on cumulative solar radiation exposure for polar latitudes (as

measured at Khibiny actinometric station, 68° north latitude), moderate climate areas (Minsk, Belarus,

54° north latitude), and Russia’s south (Sochi, 44° north latitude).11 As demonstrated in the graph, global

solar radiation exposures in the north and south differ most during the winter months. In the summer,

10

USSR Climate Reference Book. Vol. 2, Part 1. Solar Radiation, Radiation Balance and Sunshine. – Leningrad, Gidrometeoizdat, 1966. – 62 pages. (Справочник по климату СССР. Вып. 2. ч.1. Солнечная радиация, радиационный баланс и солнечное сияние. – Л.: Гидрометеоиздат, 1966. – 62с.). 11

Heat Balance // Works of the Chief Geophysical Observatory, Issue No. 179. – Leningrad, Gidrometeoizdat, 1965. – 200 pages. (Тепловой баланс // Труды ГГО, вып. 179. – Л.: Гидрометеоиздат, 1965. – 200с).

Pic. 3.3. Global solar radiation exposure

on the territory of Murmansk Region (in

kilowatt-hours per square meter).

1 – Tzyp-Navolok; 2 – Dalniye Zelentzy; 3 –

Murmansk; 4 – Yaniskoski; 5 – Khibiny; 6 –

Krasnoshchelye; 7 – Umba; 8 – Chavanga.

Pic. 3.4. An annual cycle of mean monthly global solar

radiation (Q, in kilowatt-hours per square meter) in the

polar (1), middle (2) and southern (3) latitudes; an annual

cycle of potential energy production at a wind energy

converter (WWEC, in kilowatt-hours per square meter) on the

northern (4) and southern (5) coasts of the Kola Peninsula.

1 – Khibiny station; 2 – Minsk; 3 – Sochi; 4 – Dalniye Zelentzy;

5 – Chavanga.


exposure values become commensurate on account of the increased length of day in the northern

latitudes. In overall annual values, the subpolar areas of the Kola Peninsula will receive 1.3 times less

solar radiation than the middle latitudes, and 1.7 times less than the south.

Pic. 3.4 illustrates seasonal changes in both solar energy supply and the potential yield of wind

power installations in the examined areas. As solar and wind energy are in an antiphase, they can

supplement each other, which serves as a premise for the joint application of their resources.

The diurnal solar radiation cycle is first and foremost determined by the changing values of the

Sun’s elevation during the day. The highest irradiance values are observed during daylight hours in June

through July and reach, on average, between 0.4 and 0.5 kilowatts per square meter. On some days,

favorable weather conditions with minimal cloud cover obscuring the sun will allow for an increase in

irradiance values to between 0.9 and 1.0 kilowatts per square meter.

When assessing solar energy potential and prospects for its application, sunshine duration

becomes an important value as it determines the scope of incoming solar energy and the conditions for

the efficient use of solar energy systems. In Murmansk Region, which lies almost entirely above the

Arctic Circle, the average monthly number of hours of sunshine fluctuates widely throughout the year –

between zero hours in December and 200 to 300 hours in June and July (see Table 7). Cumulative annual

sunshine duration is about 1,200 hours in the north of the region, but increases to some 1,600 hours in

its southern parts.

Table 7. Monthly breakdown of sunshine duration in various localities of Murmansk Region, in hours.

Locality, name Month Total per year

I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X XI XII

Tsyp-Navolok 0 27 103 173 169 234 209 145 86 44 6 0 1,195

Dalniye Zelentsy 1 37 114 176 177 225 204 141 84 48 6 0 1,213

Murmansk 1 32 121 203 197 246 236 146 73 43 3 0 1,297

Yaniskoski 3 41 126 200 195 242 258 162 74 48 4 0 1,353

Khibiny 3 37 128 166 200 258 243 176 97 54 10 0 1,372

Krasnoshchelye 4 38 135 186 180 250 256 157 75 45 9 0 1,335

Umba 8 43 151 198 229 293 309 204 115 67 15 0 1,632

Chavanga 10 42 136 200 221 290 302 196 96 63 17 2 1,575

On the whole, the technical resources of solar energy in Murmansk Region are quite

considerable – around 1013 kilowatt-hours. But these resources are scattered across a vast area and

have low density. Significant investment funds will be required to develop practical application of solar

energy in the region. Today, the global market price for solar energy installations ranges between

EUR 4,000 and EUR 6,000 per kilowatt of installed capacity12. This is much higher than the same for, say,

wind energy converters (EUR 1,000 to EUR 2,000 per kilowatt of installed capacity). As a result, the

prime cost of power produced by solar energy installations is high as well.

The examination of prospects for solar power development in Murmansk Region shows that

solar energy resources available to the region are not insignificant. But because this is an Arctic territory

located almost completely beyond the Arctic Circle, the region’s potential solar energy supply is still

1.5 to 1.7 times less than that available to the country’s southern regions. Maximum solar radiation

exposure values in Murmansk Region are observed in the summer, while consumer demand for energy

reaches its peak in the winter. Furthermore, solar energy installations are for the time being an

12

Bezrukikh P.P. On cost indicators of energy-producing installations based on renewable energy sources. // Energeticheskaya Politika, No. 5, 2009. – Pp. 5-11. (Безруких П.П. О стоимостных показателях энергетических установок на базе возобновляемых источников энергии // Энергетическая политика, №5, 2009. – С.5-11.).


expensive option. Their price – taking heat collectors of suitable capacity into account – can be as high

as EUR 8,000 per kilowatt of installed capacity.

With all of the above taken into consideration, use of solar power installations in Russia’s Arctic

regions could be a viable alternative – but only in such isolated cases when other energy supply options

are associated with even higher costs. One such case, for instance, is the need to provide

uninterruptible telephone communication, via a satellite link, between Murmansk Region’s remote

localities – weather stations, lighthouses, and similar – and the rest of the Kola Peninsula or Russia’s

other regions. A Murmansk-based company called RSK-Avtonomniye Tekhnologii has in fact installed

solar power systems with capacities of around 1.3 kilowatts, complete with heat collectors of required

capacity, in many such outlying localities. Additionally, Norway and a number of other countries have

since 1998 provided financial support to the program of installing solar panels in place of radioisotope

thermoelectric generators***** used as power sources at lighthouses and navigation beacons in Russia’s

Northwest. Altogether, 180 radioisotope thermoelectric generators have been replaced by solar power

installations in the course of this program.

3.4. Tidal power An important characteristic of tidal energy is the reliability of its average monthly supply both

across the yearly and multi-year spans. It is owing to this feature that tidal energy, despite its

intermittent availability throughout the diurnal cycle, is a powerful source of energy and can be

recommended for use in combined operation with reservoir hydropower plants. In such a combination,

the pulsating, intermittent, but nonetheless invariably guaranteed flow of tidal energy, regulated by the

energy of hydropower plants, can contribute to power

supply to provide for the necessary electric power load.

In contrast to the energy derived from river

flow, assessing the potential of tidal energy is tied with

certain peculiarities. Where the capacity of a

hydroelectric power plant is determined by the product

of water head and flow rate, the average capacity of a

tidal power plant will be calculated by multiplying the

area of the basin to be dammed off for the future plant

by the value of tidal range to the power of two.

A reconnaissance survey of the shorelines of

the Barents and White seas to research optimal sites

there for the potential construction of tidal power

plants was carried out in Russia by Lev Bernstein as

long back as 1938 to 1941. Already then, a number of

suitable sites for construction of tidal power plants

were identified on the coasts of the Kola Peninsula (see

Pic. 3.5).

Because of the relatively low height of tides washing against the peninsula’s coastline – the

average tidal range is 2 to 3 meters – and the limited basin areas that could be cut off by a dam,

construction of tidal power plants in many locations proves from the start to be an economically

inefficient option. The concept of an efficient tidal power plant suggests that such a plant will have a

*****

Radioisotope thermoelectric generators are electrical generators that receive power from radioactive decay. See also Bellona’s extended article on radioisotope thermoelectric generators here: http://bellona.no/bellona.org/english_import_area/international/russia/navy/northern_fleet/incidents/31772. – Translator.

Pic. 3.5. Possible distribution of tidal power plants on the Kola Peninsula’s coastline. 1 – Ozerko; 2 – Kislaya Bay; 3 – Severnaya; 4 – Dalniye Zelentsy; 5 – Porchnikha; 6 – Rynda; 7 – Drozdovka; 8 – Lumbovsky.

http://bellona.no/bellona.org/english_import_area/international/russia/navy/northern_fleet/incidents/31772


capacity of hundreds of megawatts, but such capacity range greatly exceeds the levels required to meet

the demand of small remote communities whose energy needs are examined in this report.

The following conclusion presents itself: Tidal energy resources available to Murmansk Region

are concentrated along the entire 1,000-kilometer coastline of the Kola Peninsula, but successful

application of this type of energy is only possible in certain locations where a suitable basin exists, such

as a bay, that can offer a higher range of tidal wave (4 or 5 meters or higher).

In that regard, one noteworthy site is Lumbovsky Bay of the White Sea, in the east of the Kola

Peninsula, where the average tidal height is 4.2 meters, and the size of the water basin suitable for use

by a tidal power plant is between 70 and 90 kilometers. A tidal power plant with a capacity of several

hundred megawatts could be built in this location. An installation of such capacity, however, would

imply a large, grid-connected energy-generating site and as such, it falls beyond the scope of small-scale

power generation and beyond the subject matter studied in this report.

3.5. Wave power Wave energy possesses a higher energy density than wind and solar energy. Ocean waves

accumulate wind energy as they move over significant distances, and it is this advantage that makes

them a “natural energy concentrate.” Another advantage of this renewable energy source is the

availability of ocean waves to a large group of consumers residing along a coastline. The disadvantages

of wave energy, on the other hand, are its periodic instability, dependence on ice conditions, as well as

difficulties associated with converting and transmitting the power derived from ocean waves onshore to

the consumer.

Table 8 shows different values of wave energy flux in Russia’s seas.13 The values pertaining to

the Barents Sea, which borders on the far northeastern part of the Atlantic, are commensurate with

those describing the potential of ocean wave energy available at the shoreline of Norway, where these

values reach 25 to 30 kilowatts per meter.14 Taking this into account, one can conclude that in the

Barents Sea, average annual specific wave energy can be within the range of 20 to 25 kilowatts per

meter. For the White Sea, the wave energy potential is much lower – no more than 9 to 10 kilowatts per

meter.

Table 8. Wave energy flux in Russian seas.

Sea, name Wave energy flux, in kilowatts per meter

Sea of Azov 3 Black Sea 6-8 Baltic Sea 7-8

Caspian Sea 7-11 White Sea 9-11

Sea of Okhotsk 12-20 Bering Sea 15-44

Sea of Japan 21-31 Barents Sea 20-25

When considering the practical and, especially, economic aspects of using tidal energy for power

generation, one can note that the prime cost of electric power produced by ocean wave energy

converters is at present still quite high – much higher than the prime cost of power produced by

13

Sichkaryov V.I., Akulichev V.A. Ocean wave energy converters. – Moscow: Nauka, 1989. – 132 pages. (Сичкарев В.И., Акуличев В.А. Волновые энергетические станции в океане. - М.: Наука, 1989. – 132с.). 14

Vasiliyev Yu.S, Khrisanov N.I. Environmental aspects of application of renewable energy sources. – Leningrad: Leningrad State University, 1991. – 343 pages. (Васильев Ю.С., Хрисанов Н.И. Экология использования возобновляющихся энергоисточников. –Л.: Изд-во Ленингр. ун-та, 1991. – 343с.).


conventional power facilities. In the future, as fossil fuel prices rise and wave energy converters improve

in design and efficiency, this gap in costs will gradually decrease. The prospects of using ocean waves for

power production will thus improve accordingly. But this report details options that could be available

to the small remote communities of Murmansk Region in the short term; because of this, ocean wave

energy as a renewable energy source has been left outside the margins of this study.

The following, however, can be concluded when assessing the possibilities of using ocean wave

energy for power generation. The potential of wave energy in the Barents Sea is, on average,

25 kilowatts per one meter of wave front edge. This is comparable to the wave energy flux observed in

the Sea of Okhotsk (29 kilowatts per meter) and is two or three times less than that in the Bering Sea

(45 kilowatts per meter) or the North Atlantic (70 to 75 kilowatts per meter). In the White Sea, this value

is even lower – at around 10 kilowatts per meter.

Furthermore, application of ocean wave energy in the conditions of the Arctic climate presents

certain challenges – first and foremost, because ocean waves reach their peak during the colder seasons

of the year, when air temperature falls below zero and metal components or structures (such as those

that may be used in an ocean wave energy converter) become exposed to icing. For this reason – and

also because of the short length of day in the Arctic (the Polar Night) – the operation of wave energy

installations will be difficult in Murmansk Region. Another technological problem will be the

transmission of power produced by these installations onshore to the consumer. Taken as a whole, this

makes application of ocean wave energy a challenging option in Murmansk Region.

3.6. Bioenergy resources Biodegradable wastes from livestock and poultry breeding farms

The development of agricultural industries worldwide has resulted in a significant concentration

of livestock and poultry populations on farms and farming complexes and, by extension, in the accrual of

large quantities of organic waste, namely, liquid dung and poultry droppings near the farms. In broad

use at present is the method of so-called anaerobic recycling of biodegradable livestock waste, a multi-

stage process of decomposition of organic matter in special containers, or digesters, where organic

waste is processed in an oxygen-free environment by anaerobic microorganisms and produces methane

and carbon dioxide as a result.

The biogas generated as a result of waste fermentation comprises 60 to 80 percent methane,

20 to 25 percent carbon dioxide, and lesser quantities of hydrogen sulfide, hydrogen nitride, and

nitrogen oxides. Through a series of relatively simple operations, biogas can be freed from the carbon

dioxide and the traces of hydrogen sulfide and thus distilled to the grade of natural gas. As natural gas,

purified biogas can be compressed into gas cylinders and used as fuel for automotive vehicles or burned

to generate heat energy. The heat-generating capacity of biogas is 5,000 to 6,000 kilocalories per cubic

meter.

In Murmansk Region, the severe climate and weather conditions do not allow for a vigorous

development of the agricultural and farming industries. Still, there are eleven large and medium-sized

pig, poultry, and cattle (dairy) farming complexes in the region. The majority of them are located near

the regional center – the agricultural firms Tuloma and Polyarnaya Zvezda, the poultry farms Snezhnaya,

Murmanskaya, and other enterprises. Other farms operate in the vicinity of large industrial centers such

as Apatity, Kirovsk, Kovdor, or Monchegorsk. All these agricultural and farming complexes are, as a rule,

connected to the grid and receive their electric power and heat energy from major external power

sources, which solves the problem of independent power and energy supply for these consumers. Some

of the farms, such as the agroindustrial firm Tuloma, are just making their first steps toward introducing

bioenergy technologies in their operations; other enterprises, such as the agricultural complex


Kovdorsky, are well on their way summarizing the experience they have already gained employing such

technologies in practical application.

Wastes from the wood-logging and wood-working industries

A considerable portion of Murmansk Region’s wood resources was used up in the 1930s to

1980s. Timber felled in the region nowadays is no longer used for the production of paper or pulp. In the

past five years, wood harvesting output has fallen by 3.2 times – from 125,000 to 39,000 solid cubic

meters. Part of the lumber resources is sold for export, but the majority of it is used locally to produce

sawn timber. For the time being, lumber and woodwork wastes are only used in very insignificant

quantities as fuel for electric power supply and heating. A number of various obstacles still hinder the

development of full-scale application of wood-logging and woodwork wastes. Lumber camps are often

located at great distances from industrial centers or other populated areas, and no developed

infrastructure is available to effectively collect, transport, and recycle wood-logging waste.

Fishery and fish processing waste

Waste produced by the fish processing industry was used to a great extent in the 1980s as

animal feed at fur farms. For a variety of reasons, the fish processing industry in Murmansk Region has

seen a pronounced decline in the past fifteen years, with both the output of seafood and fish products,

and, by extension, wastes falling significantly. At the moment, fish processing waste is not considered

for application as a power-generating option.

To summarize, Murmansk Region’s bioenergy resources – livestock and poultry breeding waste,

primarily – are concentrated around large enough populated localities that receive their power supply

from the grid. These are the areas where issues of biodegradable waste reprocessing have relevance,

and these issues are being dealt with both by the management of the farming enterprises in question –

the agricultural companies Kovdorsky and Tuloma, among others – and by representatives of the

regional administration. But these communities and the farms and agricultural sites and facilities

operated there do not belong to the category of remote off-grid consumers whose power supply needs

are at the focus of this study. On the other hand, such localities as weather stations, lighthouses, border

outposts, or naval sites do not, as a rule, have agricultural or farming complexes in their immediate

vicinity and cannot, therefore, use agricultural or farming wastes as a reliable source of power

generation or heat energy supply. In a number of coastal communities such as Chavanga or Chapoma,

agricultural production has in the past years effectively shut down because of the prohibitive transport

costs and no possibilities to continue selling agricultural produce. Elsewhere, the settlement of

Krasnoshchelye, in the central part of the Kola Peninsula, is home to the deer-breeding farm Tundra. But

deer grazing takes place on lands quite far from the settlement, and no deer farming waste can be made

available for use as a fuel source.

Taking all of the above into account, the prospects of using agricultural and farming wastes,

wastes from the wood-logging and woodworking industries, as well as fish processing waste as

bioenergy resources for potential power and heat generation in Murmansk Region are not under

consideration at the moment.

4. Suggestions for renewable energy application for off-grid energy

supply in Murmansk Region In order to evaluate the prospects of, and develop specific suggestions for, practical application

of renewable energy sources for off-grid energy supply, one must bear in mind three principal factors:

the potential offered by a particular energy source; the availability of such conditions that would call for


and facilitate its development, and the cost of energy-producing installations (solar, wind, or wave

energy converters) that could be used at the site in question. Our assessments suggest that the

following off-grid localities look most promising today with regard to practical application of renewable

energy options in Murmansk Region.

4.1. Wind energy converters for power supply of weather stations and

lighthouses in Tsyp-Navolok, Kharlov Island, and Tersko-Orlovsky Weather stations and lighthouses are, as a rule, situated on significantly high elevations and on

an open surface, thus having an increased potential of wind energy at their disposal. A weather station

and a navigation beacon will sometimes be in close vicinity to each other and will both receive their

electric power supply from the same diesel-based power plant. This is the case with the meteorological

stations and lighthouses in the settlements of Tsyp-Navolok, Kharlov Island, and Tersko-Orlovsky, all

located on the coast of the Barents Sea (see Pic. 2.1 and 2.2). These are the localities used below as

examples for an assessment of the possibility of using wind energy converters for off-grid power supply.

Diesel plant capacities in Tsyp-Navolok, Kharlov Island, and Tersko-Orlovsky total 80, 50, an

35 kilowatts, respectively. Table 9 shows operating and economic specifications – fuel consumption

rate, staffing ratio, depreciation rate, and capital investments per unit of production – for diesel power

plants in these localities (based on data used earlier in Table 2). The number of hours the installed

capacity of a diesel power plant is used over the span of one year has been taken as equal to 3,000; the

price of diesel fuel, taking local delivery costs into account, has been taken as equal to RUR 28,000 per

ton of fuel equivalent. The component costs of a diesel plant’s total operating costs and the prime cost

of electric power produced have been calculated based on these parameters. As Table 9 shows, the

resulting prime cost of electricity ranges between RUR 17 and RUR 20 per kilowatt-hour.

Table 9. Operating and economic characteristics of diesel power plants, their operating costs,

estimated prime cost of electric power produced, and recommended wind energy converter capacity

for combined wind-diesel power systems.

Locality

Die

sel p

ow

er p

lan

t ca

pac

ity,

in k

ilow

atts

An

nu

al o

utp

ut,

in k

ilow

att-

ho

urs

Fuel

co

nsu

mp

tio

n r

ate,

in g

ram

s o

f fu

el

equ

ival

ent

per

kilo

wat

t-h

ou

r

Staf

fin

g ra

tio

, in

nu

mb

er o

f p

ers

on

nel

per

kilo

wat

t

Dep

reci

atio

n r

ate,

in p

erce

nt

Cap

ital

inve

stm

ents

, in

th

ou

san

d r

ou

ble

s

per

kilo

wat

t

Operating costs, in thousand roubles

Pri

me

cost

of

elec

tric

po

wer

, in

th

ou

san

d

rou

ble

s p

er k

ilow

att-

ho

ur

Rec

om

men

ded

win

d e

ner

gy in

stal

lati

on

cap

acit

y, in

kilo

wat

ts

Fuel

Sala

rie

s/w

ages

Dep

reci

atio

n

Oth

er

Tota

l

Tsyp-Navolok

80 240 415 0.048 15 14 2,789 922 168 218 4,097 17.1 50

Kharlov Island

50 150 430 0.057 17 16 1,806 684 136 164 2,790 18.6 30

Tersko-Orlovsky

35 105 440 0.066 18 19 1,294 554 120 135 2,103 20.0 20

Note: Figures for capital investments per kilowatt of diesel-produced electricity are represented in the table above as based on

the price lists detailing 2011 prices for diesel power stations with capacities of 8 to 640 kilowatts sold by Azimut, a Moscow-

based group of companies that produce and sell diesel power stations and generators.


Diesel power stations usually employ two or three diesel generators, of which the primary one

accounts for 50 to 60 percent of the station’s total capacity. It is with this in mind that the following

capacities are recommended for wind energy converters to be used in combination with diesel-based

plants in Tsyp-Navolok, Kharlov Island, and Tersko-Orlovsky: 50, 30, and 20 kilowatts – which

corresponds to 62, 60, and 57 percent of each diesel plant’s total power-generating capacity,

respectively. This capacity range is represented, for instance, in such German wind turbine models as

Krogmann 15/50 (capacity: 50 kilowatts; rotor diameter: 15 meters; hub height: 30 meters15), Südwind

1230 (capacity: 30 kilowatts; rotor diameter: 12.5 meters; hub height: 30 meters), and Südwind 1220

(capacity: 20 kilowatts; rotor diameter: 12.5 meters; hub height: 30 meters). The current costs of

installing such a wind energy converter, including transportation, construction of the foundation, as well

as assembly and installation and pre-commissioning works, range between RUR 80,000 and RUR 90,000

(or about EUR 2,000) per kilowatt of installed capacity.

Table 10. Wind energy converter characteristics, operating costs of combined wind-diesel power

production, estimated prime cost of electric power produced, and the resulting environmental benefit

(reduction in СО2 emissions).

Locality

Capacity, in

kilowatts

Output, in thousand kilowatt-

hours

Dep

reci

atio

n r

ate

at w

ind

en

erg

y co

nve

rter

, in

per

cen

t

Cap

ital

inve

stm

ents

in w

ind

en

ergy

co

nve

rter

,

in t

ho

usa

nd

ro

ub

les

per

kilo

wat

t


Pri

me

cost

of

elec

tric

po

wer

, in

th

ou

san

d

rou

ble

s p

er k

ilow

att-

ho

ur

Pri

me

cost

red

uct

ion

, in

per

cen

t

Red

uct

ion

in c

arb

on

dio

xid

e em

issi

on

s, in

to

ns

Die

sel p

ow

er p

lan

t

Win

d e

ner

gy c

on

vert

er

Die

sel p

ow

er p

lan

t

Win

d e

ner

gy c

on

vert

er

Fuel

Sala

rie

s/w

ages

Dep

reci

atio

n

Oth

er

Tota

l

Tsyp-Navolok

80 50 160.8 (67%)

79.2 (33%)

7 80 1,868 922 448 274 3,512 14.6 14.6 69.0

(↓ 33%)

Kharlov Island

50 30 73.5

(49%) 76.5

(51%) 7 85 885 684 315 200 2,084 13.9 25.3

69.1 (↓ 51%)

Tersko-Orlovsky

35 20 55.9

(53%) 49.1

(47%) 7 90 689 554 246 160 1,649 15.7 21.5

45.4 (↓ 47%)

In the examined localities – Tsyp-Navolok, Kharlov Island, and Tersko-Orlovsky – the average

annual wind speeds at an elevation of 10 meters above the ground reach 7.1, 9.2, and 7.3 meters per

second, respectively. Using the power-law dependence of the vertical wind profile on elevation – a

relationship where the ratio of a value of wind speed at one elevation (VH, at elevation H) to a value at a

different elevation (Vh, at elevation h) is calculated according to VH / Vh = (Н / h )m, where m is the

exponent – one can estimate average annual wind speeds at the hub height to be 8.2, 10.3, and

8.4 meters per second, respectively for each of the three locations.

The share of electricity demand that can be covered by wind energy – wind energy penetration

– can be determined with the help of data represented in Pic. 4.1, which is based on the results of

analyzing extensive amounts of information and superposing the chronological cycle of a wind

15

European Wind Turbine Catalogue. Energy Centre Denmark. Copenhagen, 1994. – 63 pages.


installation’s output onto a diesel plant’s electric load. It follows from Pic. 4.1 that the share of the

electric load covered by the wind energy converter depends on the ratio of the rated – that which

determines the wind energy converter’s nominal capacity – to the average annual wind speed, as well as

the ratio of the capacity of the wind generator to that of the diesel plant. For the examined localities of

Tsyp-Navolok, Kharlov Island, and Tersko-Orlovsky, and the types of wind turbines suggested above, the

wind speed ratios would look as follows: 13 : 8.2 = 1.58; 12 : 10.3 = 1.16; and 11 : 8.4 = 1.3. Using these

ratios as part of initial data for calculations in Pic. 4.1, we can establish (see Table 10) that the share of

wind energy penetration will total 33, 51, and 47 percent, respectively for each of the communities. The

economy achieved by employing wind energy with regard to fuel consumption at the diesel plants will

be commensurate with these estimates.

Taking into account that one

kilogram of diesel fuel, when burning,

produces around three kilograms of

carbon dioxide16, reducing diesel fuel

consumption by covering part of the

electric load with wind energy can help

reduce СО2 emissions significantly. For

Tsyp-Navolok, the resulting emissions

reduction will be calculated as follows:

79.2・103 kilowatt-hours・415・10-6

tons of fuel equivalent per kilowatt-

hour・0.7 tons of diesel fuel per ton of

fuel equivalent・3 = 69 tons; for Kharlov

Island, using the same formula, the

achieved reduction will equal 69 tons as

well; for Tersko-Orlovsky, 45 tons.

Using wind energy in parallel

with a diesel-based power plant to meet

consumer load will contribute to

optimizing the diesel plant’s operating

costs by decreasing expenditures

incurred on fuel purchase and delivery, which, in turn, will result in a lower prime cost of electric power

produced. As demonstrated in Table 10, in Tsyp-Navolok, Kharlov Island, and Tersko-Orlovsky, the prime

cost of electric power can be reduced by as much as 15 to 25 percent.

4.2. Wind converters for off-grid power supply of border outposts in

Pummanki and Kildin The border outpost Pummanki is situated in the western part of the Rybachy Peninsula, not far

away from the weather station of Vayda-Guba. The outpost Kildin is in the eastern part of Kildin Island, a

small island at the entrance to Kola Bay in the Barents Sea. Both sites have considerable wind potential

at their disposal. Average annual wind speeds at a 10-meter elevation mark reach 7.0 meters per second

in Pummanki, and 7.5 meters per second in Kildin.

16

Ravich M.B. Efficiency of fuel use. – Moscow: Nauka, 1977. – 344 pages. (Равич М.Б. Эффективность использования топлива. – М.: Наука, 1977. – 344с.).

Pic. 4.1. Dependence of the share of wind electricity

(αe) in meeting electricity demand on the ratios of wind

energy converter (WEC) to diesel power plant (DPP)

capacities (βe = NWECmax / NDPPmax) and rated to

average annual wind speeds /r.


The capacities of the diesel power plants in use at these sites are much higher than those that

provide power to weather stations and navigation beacons and total 120 kilowatts in Pummanki, and

170 kilowatts in Kildin. These plants operate three or four diesel generators of varying capacities.

Table 11 lists initial operating and economic characteristics – fuel consumption rate, staffing

ratio, depreciation rate, and capital investments per unit of production – for diesel power plants in these

localities (based on data used earlier in Table 2). The number of diesel plant operating hours has been

taken as equal to 3,000; the price of diesel fuel, taking local delivery costs into account, has been taken

as equal to RUR 28,000 per ton of fuel equivalent. The component costs of the diesel plants’ total

operating costs and the prime cost of electric power produced have been calculated based on these

parameters. The resulting prime cost of electricity, as shown in the table, ranges between RUR 15 and

RUR 16 per kilowatt-hour.

The capacities recommended for wind energy converters to be used in combination with diesel-

based plants in Pummanki and Kildin are, respectively, 80 and 100 kilowatts (or 67 and 59 percent of the

diesel plant’s generating capacity in each case). Among the wind turbine models that offer such

capacities are, for example: Lagerwey (capacity: 80 kilowatts; rotor diameter: 18 meters; hub height:

40 meters) and Fuhrlander FL 100 (capacity: 100 kilowatts; rotor diameter: 21 meters; hub height:

35 meters)17. The current costs of installing such a wind energy converter will be around RUR 80,000 per

kilowatt of installed capacity.

Table 11. Operating and economic characteristics of power supply in the border outposts Pummanki and Kildin, operating costs, prime cost of electric power produced, and recommended wind energy converter capacity for combined wind-diesel power systems.

Locality

Die

sel p

ow

er p

lan

t ca

pac

ity,

in k

ilow

atts

An

nu

al o

utp

ut,

in k

ilow

att-

ho

urs

Fuel

co

nsu

mp

tio

n r

ate,

in g

ram

s o

f fu

el

equ

ival

ent

per

kilo

wat

t-h

ou

r

Staf

fin

g ra

tio

, in

nu

mb

er o

f p

ers

on

nel

per

kilo

wat

t

Dep

reci

atio

n r

ate,

in p

erce

nt

Cap

ital

inve

stm

ents

, in

th

ou

san

d r

ou

ble

s

per

kilo

wat

t


Pri

me

cost

of

elec

tric

po

wer

, in

th

ou

san

d

rou

ble

s p

er k

ilow

att-

ho

ur

Rec

om

men

ded

win

d e

ner

gy in

stal

lati

on

cap

acit

y, in

kilo

wat

ts

Fuel

Sala

rie

s/w

ages

Dep

reci

atio

n

Oth

er

Tota

l

Pummanki 120 240 450 0.042 14 12 4,082 1,210 202 282 5,776 16.4 80

Kildin 170 150 400 0.038 133 10 5,712 1,550 221 354 7,837 15.4 100

At the outposts of Pummanki and Kildin, the average annual wind speeds at the hub heights

specified above will be 8.4 and 8.8 meters per second, respectively. The share of the wind energy

converter in covering local electricity demand can be determined, again, with the help of Pic. 4.1. The

source data used in this graph are the rated and average annual wind speeds, as well as the ratios of

wind energy converters’ capacities to those of diesel power plants. For the examined localities,

Pummanki and Kildin, and the wind turbines suggested above, the wind speed ratios are as follows:

17

Wind Energy-2002. – Osnabrueck, Deutschland, Bundesverband WindEnergie – 2002. – 265 pages.


14 : 8.4 = 1.67, and 13 : 8.8 = 1.48. Using these data and resulting calculations from Pic. 4.1, we can

establish (see Table 12) that the share of wind energy in meeting the electric load in Pummanki and

Kildin will be 32 and 35 percent, respectively. The diesel fuel economy achieved by using wind energy in

combination with diesel power will be at commensurate levels.

Table 12. Operating characteristics of wind energy converters at the outposts Pummanki and Kildin, operating costs of combined wind-diesel power production, prime cost of electric power produced, and the resulting environmental benefit (reduction in СО2 emissions).

Locality

Capacity, in

kilowatts

Output, in thousand kilowatt-

hours

Dep

reci

atio

n r

ate

at w

ind

en

erg

y co

nve

rter

, in

per

cen

t

Cap

ital

inve

stm

ents

in w

ind

en

ergy

co

nve

rter

, in

tho

usa

nd

ro

ub

les

per

kilo

wat

t


Pri

me

cost

of

elec

tric

po

wer

, in

th

ou

san

d

rou

ble

s p

er k

ilow

att-

ho

ur

Pri

me

cost

red

uct

ion

, in

per

cen

t

Red

uct

ion

in c

arb

on

dio

xid

e em

issi

on

s, in

to

ns

Die

sel p

ow

er p

lan

t

Win

d e

ner

gy c

on

vert

er

Die

sel p

ow

er p

lan

t

Win

d e

ner

gy c

on

vert

er

Fuel

Sala

rie

s/w

ages

Dep

reci

atio

n

Oth

er

Tota

l

Pummanki 120 80 244.8 (66%)

115.1 (32%)

7 78 2,776 1,210 639 370 4,995 13.9 13.1 98.0

(↓ 32%)

Kildin 80 100 331.5 (65%)

178.5 (35%)

7 78 3,712 1,550 767 463 6,492 12.7 17.5 149.9

(↓ 35%)

Because one kilogram of diesel fuel, when burning, produces three kilograms of carbon

dioxide18, the reduced use of diesel fuel as a result of employing wind energy converters will help

achieve the following annual reductions in СО2 emissions: At the outpost of Pummanki:

115.2・103 kilowatt-hours・405・10-6 tons of fuel equivalent per kilowatt-hour・0.7 tons of diesel fuel

per ton of fuel equivalent・3 = 98 tons; at the outpost of Kildin: 150 tons.

Using wind energy converters in combination with diesel-based power plants will contribute to

optimizing the diesel plants’ operating costs by decreasing expenses on fuel purchase and delivery,

which, by extension, will reduce the prime cost of electric power produced. As shown in Table 12, in

Pummanki and Kildin, using wind energy converters to cover part of local electricity demand will reduce

the prime cost of electric power by around 17 and 13 percent, respectively.

4.3. Wind energy converter for the settlement of Chapoma Chapoma is a settlement located in the mouth of the river Chapoma in the southeastern part of

the Kola Peninsula. The wind potential at this locality is higher than average, with annual wind speeds

reaching 5.5 meters per second at an elevation of 10 meters above the ground.

Local power supply is provided by a diesel-fired power station with a total capacity of

300 kilowatts (two generator units with a capacity of 120 kilowatts each and one 60-kilowatt generator).

Table 13 shows initial operating and economic characteristics of Chapoma’s diesel power plant –

fuel consumption rate, staffing ratio, depreciation rate, and capital investments per unit of production.

18

See Footnote 16.


The number of diesel plant operating hours has been taken as equal to 3,000; the price of diesel fuel,

taking local delivery costs into account, has been taken as equal to RUR 28,000 per ton of fuel

equivalent. These parameters have been used to calculate the component costs of the diesel plant’s

total operating costs and the prime cost of electric power produced. The latter, as shown in Table 13,

equals RUR 14.2 per kilowatt-hour.

The recommended wind energy converter capacity for wind power integration in Chapoma is

150 kilowatts, which will correspond to 50 percent of the diesel plant’s capacity. One such wind turbine

model will be, for instance, Nordex N27/150 (rotor diameter: 27 meters; rated wind speed: 11 meters

per second; hub height: 30 meters)19. The cost of installing such a wind energy converter is around

RUR 75,000 per kilowatt of installed capacity.

In Chapoma, the expected average annual wind speed at the hub height of the wind turbine

suggested above is relatively low, just 6.6 meters per second. But owing to the design of this particular

model, which ensures the turbine’s nominal capacity at wind speeds as low as 11 meters per second, the

share of the wind energy converter in covering local electricity demand – given the ratio of rated to

average annual wind speeds at 11 : 6.6 = 1.67 – will, as per Pic. 4.1 above, equal 25 percent. The share of

diesel fuel saved by using wind energy in combination with diesel power in Chapoma will be of the same

proportion.

Table 13. Operating and economic characteristics of power supply in Chapoma, operating costs,

estimated prime cost of electric power produced, and recommended wind energy converter capacity

for combined wind-diesel power production.

Locality

Die

sel p

ow

er p

lan

t ca

pac

ity,

in k

ilow

atts

An

nu

al o

utp

ut,

in k

ilow

att-

ho

urs

Fuel

co

nsu

mp

tio

n r

ate,

in g

ram

s o

f fu

el

equ

ival

ent

per

kilo

wat

t-h

ou

r

Staf

fin

g ra

tio

, in

nu

mb

er o

f p

ers

on

nel

per

kilo

wat

t

Dep

reci

atio

n r

ate,

in p

erce

nt

Cap

ital

inve

stm

ents

, in

th

ou

san

d r

ou

ble

s

per

kilo

wat

t


Pri

me

cost

of

elec

tric

po

wer

, in

tho

usa

nd

ro

ub

les

per

kilo

wat

t-h

ou

r

Rec

om

men

ded

win

d e

ner

gy in

stal

lati

on

cap

acit

y, in

kilo

wat

ts

Fuel

Sala

rie

s/w

ages

Dep

reci

atio

n

Oth

er

Tota

l

Chapoma 300 900 385 0.032 11 9 9,702 2,304 297 520 12,823 14.2 150

As noted above, one kilogram of diesel fuel, when burning, produces three kilograms of carbon

dioxide20. Consequently, the reduced use of diesel fuel as a result of employing a wind energy converter

will help achieve the following annual reduction in СО2 emissions for Chapoma: 225・103 kilowatt-

hours・385・10-6 tons of fuel equivalent per kilowatt-hour・0.7 tons of diesel fuel per ton of fuel

equivalent・3 = 182 tons.

As with other examples above, using a wind energy converter in combination with the diesel-

based power plant will contribute to optimizing the Chapoma diesel plant’s operating costs by

decreasing expenses on fuel purchase and delivery, which, in turn, will result in a lower prime cost of

19

See Footnote 15. 20

See Footnote 16.


electric power produced. As shown in Table 14, using wind energy to cover part of the local electric load

will reduce the prime cost of electric power in Chapoma by 11 percent.

Table 14. Wind energy converter parameters, operating costs of combined wind-diesel power

production, estimated prime cost of electric power produced, and the resulting environmental benefit

(reduction in СО2 emissions).

Locality

Capacity, in

kilowatts

Output, in thousand

kilowatt-hours

Dep

reci

atio

n r

ate

at w

ind

en

erg

y co

nve

rter

,

in p

erce

nt

Cap

ital

inve

stm

ents

in w

ind

en

ergy

con

vert

er, i

n t

ho

usa

nd

ro

ub

les

per

kilo

wat

t


Pri

me

cost

of

elec

tric

po

wer

, in

th

ou

san

d

rou

ble

s p

er k

ilow

att-

ho

ur

Pri

me

cost

red

uct

ion

, in

per

cen

t

Red

uct

ion

in c

arb

on

dio

xid

e em

issi

on

s, in

ton

s

Die

sel p

ow

er p

lan

t

Win

d e

ner

gy c

on

vert

er

Die

sel p

ow

er p

lan

t

Win

d e

ner

gy c

on

vert

er

Fuel

Sala

rie

s/w

ages

Dep

reci

atio

n

Oth

er

Tota

l

Chapoma 300 150 675

(75%) 225

(25%) 7 74 7,277 2,304 1,074 676 11,331 12.6 11.3

182 (↓ 35%)

4.4. Small hydropower plant on the Yelreka near Krasnoshchelye Krasnoshchelye is a settlement standing on the River Ponoi, in the central part of the Kola

Peninsula. The village is located at a distance of more than 150 kilometers away from the nearest source

of grid electricity. Besides air transport, it has no connection to other areas except a sleigh road during

winter. Central electric power supply is not planned for this village in the near future. Currently, the

main energy source for this place is a diesel power station with a capacity of around 500 kilowatts.

Four tributaries to the Ponoi were

earlier under consideration as the potential

sites for a small-scale hydropower plant to

cover energy needs of Krasnoshchelye –

Pyatchema, Yelreka, Kuksha, and Sakharnaya.

They all are similar in their energy potential

specifications, which is why the main criterion

for the selection of a waterway and a suitable

hydrosite for the small plant for

Krasnoshchelye was their distance from the

consumer. The site on the Yelreka River is

located 12 kilometers from the river estuary

and only 6 kilometers from the settlement,

which was the major contributing factor when

making the choice in favor of this site.

The optimal headrace for the

suggested hydropower station is 164 meters,

the reservoir’s complete area is 12.3 square

kilometers, and the effective storage capacity

Pic. 4.2. Prospective sites for small hydroelectric power plant projects on the Kola Peninsula. 1— Hydropower plant on the Yelreka; 2 —

Hydropower plant on the Chavanga.


is 37 million cubic meters. A two-unit hydropower plant can be proposed for the site – an option that,

compared with that of a one-unit station that would be smaller (in terms of the amount of construction

works needed for the plant’s building), suggests improved operation reliability and simplified

procedures of the plant’s operation during planned maintenance works in the summer. With the value

of the maximum possible head at 9 meters, the best option for the project is a run-of-river turbine

house with pressure turbine pits and vertical Kaplan turbines.

As regards dam types, an earth-and-rock fill dam with a moraine impervious core has been

chosen. The dams’ top width is 8 meters, and its length is 1,100 meters. No fish ladder is provided for at

the hydropower plant since at the site to be dammed off, and further upstream, the river presents no

particular value as a fishery resource.

To determine the best installed capacity for the small-scale hydropower plant on the Yelreka,

the main energy and economic parameters have been estimated in accordance with five possible

capacity values: 300, 500, 600, 800, and 1,000 kilowatts. With regard to operation in combination with

Krasnoshchelye’s diesel power plant, calculations show that the optimal value for the installed capacity

of the hydropower plant would be 500 kilowatts. The diesel power station is expected primarily to cover

part of the load during low flow periods, as well as to serve as a load and emergency reserve.

To summarize, the best recommended option to meet the energy demand of the village of

Krasnoshchelye will be a small run-of-river hydroelectric power plant with an installed capacity of

500 kilowatts (two units with a rotor diameter of 1 meter each and a rated head of 6 meters) and an

expected annual electricity output of 2.7 million kilowatt-hours.

Table 15. Basic specifications of hydropower equipment produced by Russian manufacturers.

Company, name Head, in meters Generating unit

capacity, in kilowatts Cost, in thousand

roubles per kilowatt

NETRAEL 8–16 160–700 44–18

INSET 7.5–400 200–500 36–19

The evaluation of small hydropower’s economic potential in localities under consideration in

this report is based on existing prices for primary hydropower equipment for small generating stations

as offered by such companies as INSET and the Research and manufacturing association NETRAEL******

(see Table 15). Experience accumulated in building small and mini-hydropower stations both in Russia

and worldwide suggests that the cost of power equipment installed at a given plant will account for

20 to 30 percent of its total costs. Based on these figures, overall capital investments required for a

small hydropower plant on the Yelreka as per current prices will be around RUR 90 million. Calculations

show that with 5 employees as the necessary number of operating personnel, salaries at RUR 20,000 per

employee per month, and depreciation rate at 7 percent, the prime cost of electric power produced by

such a station will be around RUR 3.4 per kilowatt-hour. Today, the prime cost of electric power

generated by the diesel-based power plant in operation in Krasnoshchelye stands at about RUR 14 to

RUR 15 per kilowatt-hour.

******

For more information on these companies, see http://corp-eeek.ru/index.php?do=static&page=%CD%E5%F2%F0%E0%FD%EB (in Russian) and http://www.inset.ru/e/index.htm. – Translator.

http://corp-eeek.ru/index.php?do=static&page=%CD%E5%F2%F0%E0%FD%EB

http://corp-eeek.ru/index.php?do=static&page=%CD%E5%F2%F0%E0%FD%EB

http://www.inset.ru/e/index.htm


4.5. Small hydropower plant on the river Chavanga The site for this station was earlier chosen at an 8.5-kilometer mark from the estuary, and at a

distance of 7.5 kilometers from the settlement of Chavanga (see Pic. 4.2). The normal headwater level is

54.4 meters; the useful water storage capacity is 8.3 million cubic meters. Such capacity values, in

combination with the considerable river water content – the average flow is 15 cubic meters per second

– allows for the unrestricted daily and partial seasonal regulation. The head at the hydrosite ranges from

9 meters to 15 meters.

Calculations based on parameters for a combined operation of the hydrosite and a diesel power

plant have helped determine the optimal value for the installed capacity of the hydropower plant on the

Chavanga, with possible capacity values ranging between 300 kilowatts and 1,500 kilowatts. The optimal

installed capacity was finally estimated at 1,250 kilowatts. Such capacity can ensure power supply both

to Chavanga and the neighboring villages of Chapoma, Tetrino, Strelna, and Pyalitsa, and provide good

groundwork for their future development.

The recommended hydropower plant option – a reservoir-type station with an installed capacity

of 1,250 kilowatts – is a project with two turbine units with the rotor diameter of 1.0 meter each and a

standard power house with short pressure penstocks and bent suction tubes. The hydrosite’s earth-and-

rock fill dam with the impervious core made of moraine is 900 meters long; its top width is 8 meters. In

order to preserve salmon stock, a 190-meter-long fish ladder is included among the main structures,

consisting of 16 pools three by five meters each and two resting pools three by ten meters each.

Based on data from Table 15 above, the total capital investments into a hydropower plant on

the river Chavanga could today reach RUR 200 million. Calculations show that the prime cost of electric

power produced by the station will be around RUR 3.2 per kilowatt-hour. This is considerably lower than

the prime cost of energy generated by the existing diesel-fueled power plant, where that value in 2011

was between RUR 14 and RUR 15 per kilowatt-hour.

Table 16. Basic operating characteristics of first-priority small hydroelectric power plants proposed for

electricity supply to off-grid consumers in Murmansk Region.

River, name Installed hydropower

plant capacity, in kilowatts

Average annual output, in million

kilowatt-hours Head, in meters

Flow rate, in cubic meters per second

Yelreka 500 2.7 6 10

Chavanga 1.250 6.3 10 15

Taking all of the above into account, two small hydroelectric power plants can be recommended

as first-priority hydropower sites to cover off-grid electricity demand in Murmansk Region. The main

operating parameters describing these two projects are listed in Table 16. Both projects are designed for

half-peak load conditions and are each proposed as the primary source of electricity supply for the off-

grid consumers residing in the neighboring communities.

For the two hydropower projects described above, no particular need exists to prioritize one

over the other in terms of construction time frames. Each of the two is important for its own

prospective local consumers. It is only the local consumers and the local conditions that can determine

the best time to start the implementation of the project. But where time frames are concerned, one

point is crucial for all small hydropower plant projects – completing all construction works within one

year so as to ensure a speedy and efficient return of the invested funds. Financing for these projects

should, in our opinion, come from a variety of sources: consumers’ own funds, regional and district

administrations, the region’s energy supply and distribution system, other state agencies, organizations,

and enterprises, and, where possible, private businesses and even foreign capital.


4.6. Premises for application of wind energy in heat generation A number of factors favor the application of wind energy in heat energy generation in

Murmansk Region:

1. high wind energy potential, especially in coastal areas;

2. the lengthy heating season, which on the Kola Peninsula lasts for nine months, or

longer;

3. the winter wind speed maximum, which coincides with the seasonal peak in heat energy

demand on the part of the consumer;

4. using wind energy converters for heating needs will help turn wind from a climate factor

that contributes to increased heat losses into a full-fledged energy source capable of

providing a steady flow of energy for the consumer’s heating needs exactly during the

windiest periods of the year;

5. using wind energy converters will also help cut the considerable fuel expenditures, by

reducing both fuel consumption and, by extension, the costs of fuel transportation from

other regions and via local delivery;

6. finally, using wind energy converters for heating purposes enables control over the main

disadvantage of this energy source, which remains a factor to contend with otherwise –

namely, its variability across prolonged periods of time. The brief second- and minute-

long lapses in a wind energy converter’s capacity are absorbed by the accumulating

capability of the heat supply system; fluctuations that last longer – dozens of minutes to

several hours – are balanced out by the accumulating capacity of the heated buildings or

with the help of backup heating sources based on fossil fuel.

4.7. Using wind energy for heating in Tsyp-Navolok and Kildin Previous subchapters in this report detailed the option of using wind energy converters in

combination with diesel-fired power stations to cover a portion of the electric load in a number of

remote coastal communities of Murmansk Region. No less attractive are the prospects of employing

wind energy to provide for the heating needs of these consumers, since the fuel they use for heating –

firewood, coal, or oil products – are delivered to them by sea, with loading and unloading operations at

the point of origin and at the local destination, which means additional transport costs and significant

increases in fuel expenses. No option to harvest and stock firewood locally exists for the communities

examined above, since Tsyp-Navolok and Kildin are situated in the open tundra, far from the wooded

areas of the peninsula. At the same time, these localities experience an increased demand in heat

energy owing to the severe climate and weather conditions prevailing in these parts.

Based on the number of residents in Tsyp-Navolok and Kildin – 43 and 80 in each – boiler plants

of capacities of 0.2 and 0.4 gigacalories per hour, respectively, will be needed to meet the residential

load and provide heating for non-domestic purposes.

Table 17 shows the initial operating and economic characteristics of boiler plants – efficiency

ratio, staffing ratio, depreciation rate, and capital investments per unit of production – as per data used

earlier in Table 4. The number of boiler plant operating hours has been taken as equal to 3,500, and the

price of domestic heating oil – which is less expensive than diesel fuel – has been taken as equal to

RUR 24,000 per ton of fuel equivalent, with local transport costs taken into account. Based on these

parameters, the boiler plants’ operating costs and the component costs have been calculated, as well as

the resulting prime cost of heat energy. The latter, as shown in Table 17, comes to RUR 6,500 and

RUR 7,700 per gigacalorie produced, for Kildin and Tsyp-Navolok, respectively.


Boiler plants are usually equipped with three or four boilers that are engaged consecutively as

the heating load increases. Studies show that the optimal capacity of wind energy converters used for

parallel operation with heating plants ranges between 60 and 80 percent of the boiler plant’s capacity.

In such cases, the wind energy converter can assume all of the heating load and only in certain rare

circumstances – such as warm air temperatures or extremely strong winds – will the wind installation’s

output partially exceed demand. Taking this into consideration, the capacities of wind energy converters

recommended for combined operation with boiler plants in Tsyp-Navolok and Kildin will be 150 and

300 kilowatts, respectively, or

65 percent of the boiler plant’s

capacity in each case.

The suitable wind turbine

models that could be suggested for

Tsyp-Navolok and Kildin are, for

instance, Nordex N27/150

(capacity: 150 kilowatts; rotor

diameter: 27 meters; rated wind

speed: 11 meters per second; hub

height: 30 meters)21 and ENERCON

E-30/3.30 (capacity: 300 kilowatts;

rotor diameter: 30 meters; rated

wind speed: 12 meters per second;

hub height: 49 meters)22. In Tsyp-

Navolok and Kildin, the average

annual wind speeds at the hub

height of the recommended wind

energy converter models will be

8.2 and 9.2 meters per second,

respectively.

The share of wind energy

penetration (αh) – the portion of the

heating load that the wind energy

converter will assume during the

heating season – is the ratio of the wind installation’s annual output to the annual heat energy

consumption rate. In order to determine the value of αh, vast amounts of data have been processed that

were obtained from wind speed and air temperature observations by weather survey stations of

Murmansk Region.23 The results of this analysis reveal a dependency of αh on the wind regime (average

annual wind speed, ), the wind energy converter’s specifications (rated wind speed, r ), and the ratio

of the wind energy converter’s capacity to that of the heating plant (see Pic. 4.3).

Using wind energy in combination with a boiler plant helps optimize the latter’s operating costs

by decreasing fuel costs and thus reducing the prime cost of heat energy produced. In the examined

localities of Tsyp-Navolok and Kildin (see Table 18), using wind energy converters to assume a share of

the total heating load can reduce the prime cost of heat energy by 33 and 29 percent, respectively.

21

See Footnote 15. 22

Wind Energy – 2004. – Osnabrueck, Deutschland, Bundesverband WindEnergie Service GmbH. – 2004. – 196 pages. 23

See Footnote 9.

Pic. 4.3. Dependence of the share of wind energy (αh) in meeting heat energy demand on the ratio of wind energy converter (WEC) capacity to heating plant (HP) capacity (βh = NWEC / NHP).


Table 17. Operating and economic characteristics of heat supply in Tsyp-Navolok and Kildin, operating

costs, estimated prime cost of heat energy produced, and recommended wind energy converter

capacity for combined wind energy and boiler operation.

Locality

Bo

iler

pla

nt

cap

acit

y, in

gig

acal

ori

es p

er

ho

ur

An

nu

al o

utp

ut,

in g

igac

alo

ries

Effi

cien

cy r

ate,

in g

ram

s o

f fu

el e

qu

ival

ent

per

kilo

wat

t-h

ou

r

Staf

fin

g ra

tio

, in

nu

mb

er o

f p

ers

on

nel

per

giga

calo

rie

Dep

reci

atio

n r

ate,

in p

erce

nt

Cap

ital

inve

stm

ents

, in

th

ou

san

d r

ou

ble

s

per

gig

acal

ori

e p

er h

ou

r


Pri

me

cost

of

hea

t en

ergy

, in

th

ou

san

d

rou

ble

s p

er g

igac

alo

rie

per

ho

ur

Rec

om

men

ded

win

d e

ner

gy in

stal

lati

on

cap

acit

y, in

kilo

wat

ts

Fuel

Sala

rie

s/w

ages

Dep

reci

atio

n

Oth

er

Tota

l

Tsyp-Navolok

0.2 700 0.60 23 10 2.23 4,003 1,104 45 230 5,382 7.69 150

Kildin 0.4 1,400 0.65 14 10 2.13 7,392 1,344 85 286 9,107 6.51 300

Table 18. Wind energy converter specifications for Tsyp-Navolok and Kildin, operating costs of heat

energy production in combined wind energy and boiler plant operation, estimated prime cost of heat

energy produced, and the resulting environmental benefit (reduction in СО2 emissions).

Locality

Capacity Output, in

gigacalories

Dep

reci

atio

n r

ate

at w

ind

en

erg

y co

nve

rter

,

in p

erce

nt

Cap

ital

inve

stm

ents

in w

ind

en

ergy

con

vert

er, i

n t

ho

usa

nd

ro

ub

les

per

kilo

wat

t Operating costs, in thousand roubles

Pri

me

cost

of

hea

t en

ergy

, in

th

ou

san

d

rou

ble

s p

er g

igac

alo

rie

Pri

me

cost

red

uct

ion

, in

per

cen

t

Red

uct

ion

in c

arb

on

dio

xid

e em

issi

on

s, in

ton

s

Bo

iler

pla

nt,

in g

igac

alo

rie

per

ho

ur

Win

d e

ner

gy c

on

vert

er, i

n k

ilow

atts

Bo

iler

pla

nt

Win

d e

ner

gy c

on

vert

er

Fuel

Sala

rie

s/w

ages

Dep

reci

atio

n

Oth

er

Tota

l

Tsyp-Navolok

0.2 150 224

(32%) 476

(68%) 7 74 1,281 1,104 822 385 3,592 5.13 33.3

238 (↓ 68%)

Kildin 0.4 300 406

(29%) 994

(71%) 7 67 2,144 1,344 1,492 567 6,492 4.64 28.7

459 (↓ 71%)


Conclusion Because of the great distances that separate them from the rest of the region and the low rate

of energy consumption, several dozen outlying communities on the Kola Peninsula have no access to

grid electricity and receive their power supply from small diesel-fueled power plants with capacities

ranging between 8 and 500 kilowatts. This category of off-grid consumers includes weather survey

stations, lighthouses and navigation beacons, coastal border outposts, fisheries, and deer farms.

Fuel deliveries to these communities are contingent on the condition of the roads and other

transport networks and show a clear seasonal dependence on the availability of transport links. Both the

lack of a developed transport infrastructure and the complicated multi-stage shipping logistics result in

fuel losses during transportation and increased fuel costs for the end consumer. Information collected

on the expenses incurred on fuel deliveries to off-grid communities of the Kola Peninsula allows one to

conclude that the additional transport costs may cause the final price of fuel for the consumer to rise by

as much as 1.5 to 3 times.

The existing power supply sources in these localities show wear, and their technical condition

does not meet modern standards. These two factors lead to low economic efficiency and significant

additional expenses required for continued operation of these power-generating facilities. Improving

power supply systems of small off-grid communities of Murmansk Region is therefore a rather pressing

task. Local renewable energy sources are the resource that can offer options to enhance energy

efficiency, reduce the financial burden, and ensure a reliable power and heat energy supply in these

localities.

This report is an attempt to analyze the economic aspects of using small-scale renewable energy

installations in the remote communities of Murmansk Region that have no access to central power

supply. Application of renewable energy sources for electricity production and heating purposes can and

should play an important role in the sustainable development of the outlying areas of the region, by

providing local residents with the necessary heat and electric power supply and thus raising their

standard of living.

Studies show that immense resources of renewable energy are available to Murmansk Region,

but they are scattered across a vast territory and have, for the most part, low concentration. While

evaluating the prospects of practical application of these renewable energy sources, three principal

factors were taken into account: the existing potential of a particular energy source, premises that may

contribute to its efficient use in a given location, and the cost of energy-generating equipment required

to implement such a project. The analysis done in this report demonstrates that wind energy converters

and small hydroelectric power stations would be the optimal solutions for off-grid power supply in

remote settlements of the Kola Peninsula.

Wind energy could be used both for electric power production, in combined operation with

diesel-based power plants, and for heating purposes, to assume part of the load currently covered by

boiler plants running on fossil fuel. Calculations performed with regard to the first option – combined

wind-diesel power supply for the coastal communities of Tsyp-Navolok, Kharlov Island, Tersko-Orlovsky,

and the border outposts Pummanki and Kildin – show that using wind energy converters in these

localities could help reduce fuel consumption at diesel power plants by 30 to 50 percent, the prime cost

of power produced by 15 to 25 percent, and carbon dioxide emissions by as much as 30 to 50 percent.

The second option – using wind energy for heating purposes – offers the advantage of turning wind

from a climate factor responsible for high heat losses in severe weather conditions of the Arctic north

into a reliable energy source that will supply the much-needed heat energy precisely during the windiest

periods of the year. Applying wind energy for heating needs in parallel operation with boiler plants in


Tsyp-Navolok and Kildin will likewise result in considerable savings of the expensive fuel delivered to

these localities from other regions, reducing fuel use by 68 to 71 percent and the prime cost of heat

energy produced by 29 to 33 percent, with the added ecological effect of reducing CO2 and black carbon

emissions.

Murmansk Region has a great number of small rivers with potential for the development of

small-scale hydropower projects. In our view, among the off-grid communities of Murmansk Region that

could benefit from using small hydropower for reliable and cost-efficient electricity supply, the

settlements of Krasnoshchelye and Chavanga are such localities where mini hydroelectric power plants

could be best recommended for these purposes.

The conclusions we made while preparing this report serve to support the economic expediency

of integrating renewable energy technologies into the current system of electric power and heat energy

supply in remote off-grid communities. Renewable energy has lately seen a stable trend toward lesser

capital expenditures needed to get such projects off the ground and lower energy generation costs. The

International Energy Agency forecasts a decrease in capital investments into wind energy from $1,100

per kilowatt as of 2005 to $800 per kilowatt by 2030. The prime cost of power produced by wind energy

converters is expected to fall by up to 15 percent. Global development of small hydropower has shown a

similar tendency, with capital investments decreasing and the prime cost of hydropower likewise falling

as a result.

Following the payback period, when the funds invested into a renewable energy project have

been recouped, operating costs remain the only factor determining the cost of electric power and heat

energy produced by the renewable energy source. And these costs, as follows from the analysis

conducted in this report, are significantly lower than those incurred today by using conventional fuel

sources for power and heat generation in remote communities. In other words, renewable energy is a

competitive alternative to the options currently used to provide electric power and heat to settlements

with no access to centralized energy supply.

Finally, bringing renewable energy to off-grid rural localities of Murmansk Region will not only

help achieve significant savings in fuel and other costs, but will also contribute to a healthier

environment in these communities, thus greatly improving their standard of living overall.


List of references Translator’s note:

For the reader’s convenience, non-English titles of sources cited in this report are stated in their English

translations first, followed by the original titles in Russian.

1. Bezrukikh P.P., Borisov G.A., Vissarionov V.I. et al. Energy resources and the efficiency of

using renewable energy sources in Russia. – St. Petersburg: Nauka, 2002. – 314 pages.

(Ресурсы и эффективность использования возобновляемых источников энергии в

России / Безруких П.П., Борисов Г.А., Виссарионов В.И. и др. – С.-Пб.: Наука, 2002. –

314с.).

2. Energy Strategy of Russia for the Period up to 2030. – Moscow: Institute of Energy

Strategy, 2010. – 180 pages. (Энергетическая стратегия России на период до 2030

года. – М.: ГУ Институт энергетической стратегии, 2010. – 180с.). See also

http://www.energystrategy.ru/projects/docs/ES-2030_%28Eng%29.pdf.

3. USSR Climate Reference Book. Vol. 1, Part 2. Air and soil temperatures. – Leningrad:

Gidrometeoizdat, 1965. – 359 pages. (Справочник по климату СССР. Вып. 1, ч. 2.

Температура воздуха и почвы. – Л.: Гидрометеоиздат, 1965. – 359с.).

4. Vissarionov V.I., Belkina S.V., Deryugina G.V., Kuznetsova V.A., Malinin N.K. Energy-

producing equipment for the application of unconventional and renewable energy

sources. – Moscow: OOO Firma VIEN, 2004. – 448 pages. (Энергетическое

оборудование для использования нетрадиционных и возобновляемых источников

энергии / Виссарионов В.И., Белкина С.В., Дерюгина Г.В., Кузнецова В.А., Малинин

Н.К. – М.: ООО фирма “ВИЭН”, 2004. – 448с.).

5. Barabaner Kh.Z. Heating in rural communities. – Tallinn: Valgus, 1976. – 196 pages.

(Барабанер Х.З. Теплоснабжение сельских населенных пунктов. – Таллинн: Валгус,

1976. – 196с.).

6. Stepanov I.R. Issues of energy production and supply in the north. – Leningrad: Nauka,

1976. – 129 pages. (Степанов И.Р. Проблемы энергетики Севера. – Л.: Наука, 1976. –

129с.).

7. Minin V.A., Stepanov I.R. Wind energy cadastre of the European North of the USSR. –

News of the USSR Academy of Sciences. Energy and Transport, No. 1, 1983. – Pp. 106-

114. (Минин В.А., Степанов И.Р. Ветроэнергетический кадастр европейского Севера

СССР. // Изв. АН СССР. Энергетика и транспорт, №1, 1983. – С.106-114.).

8. Zubarev V.V., Minin V.A., Stepanov I.R. Application of wind energy in the Arctic. –

Leningrad: Nauka, 1989. – 208 pages. (Зубарев В.В., Минин В.А. Степанов И.Р.

Использование энергии ветра в районах Севера. - Л.: Наука, 1989. – 208с.).

9. Minin V.A., Dmitriyev G.S. Wind energy: A promising renewable energy resource in

Murmansk Region / Minin V.A., Dmitriyev G.S., Ivanova Ye.A. et al. / Preprint. – Apatity:

Kola Science Center of the Russian Academy of Sciences, 2006. – 73 pages. (Энергия

ветра – перспективный возобновляемый энергоресурс Мурманской области /

Минин В.А., Дмитриев Г.С., Иванова Е.А. и др. / Препринт. – Апатиты: Изд. КНЦ РАН,

2006. – 73с.).

10. USSR Climate Reference Book. Vol. 2, Part 1. Solar Radiation, Radiation Balance and

Sunshine. – Leningrad, Gidrometeoizdat, 1966. – 62 pages. (Справочник по климату



СССР. Вып. 2. ч.1. Солнечная радиация, радиационный баланс и солнечное сияние.

– Л.: Гидрометеоиздат, 1966. – 62с.).

11. Heat Balance // Works of the Chief Geophysical Observatory, Issue No. 179. – Leningrad,

Gidrometeoizdat, 1965. – 200 pages. (Тепловой баланс // Труды ГГО, вып. 179. – Л.:

Гидрометеоиздат, 1965. – 200с).

12. Bezrukikh P.P. On cost indicators of energy-producing installations based on renewable

energy sources. // Energeticheskaya Politika, No. 5, 2009. – Pp. 5-11. (Безруких П.П. О

стоимостных показателях энергетических установок на базе возобновляемых

источников энергии // Энергетическая политика, №5, 2009. – С.5-11.).

13. Sichkaryov V.I., Akulichev V.A. Ocean wave energy converters. – Moscow: Nauka, 1989.

– 132 pages. (Сичкарев В.И., Акуличев В.А. Волновые энергетические станции в

океане. - М.: Наука, 1989. – 132с.).

14. Vasiliyev Yu.S, Khrisanov N.I. Environmental aspects of application of renewable energy

sources. – Leningrad: Leningrad State University, 1991. – 343 pages. (Васильев Ю.С.,

Хрисанов Н.И. Экология использования возобновляющихся энергоисточников. –Л.:

Изд-во Ленингр. ун-та, 1991. – 343с.).

15. European Wind Turbine Catalogue. Energy Centre Denmark. Copenhagen, 1994. – 63

pages.

16. Ravich M.B. Efficiency of fuel use. – Moscow: Nauka, 1977. – 344 pages. (Равич М.Б.

Эффективность использования топлива. – М.: Наука, 1977. – 344с.).

17. Wind Energy-2002. – Osnabrueck, Deutschland, Bundesverband WindEnergie – 2002. –

265 pages.

18. Wind Energy – 2004. – Osnabrueck, Deutschland, Bundesverband WindEnergie Service

GmbH. – 2004. – 196 pages.


THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

Valery Minin - Bellona Network · 1050 Brussels, Belgium [email protected] Russia: ERC Bellona P/O...

Documents

Transcript of Valery Minin - Bellona Network · 1050 Brussels, Belgium [email protected] Russia: ERC Bellona P/O...